T Nation

Obama Might Go For It

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008

I like this quote from the article:

[i]On Sunday, Obama dismissed notions that he might not be ready to run for president because of his limited experience in national politics. He agreed the job requires a “certain soberness and seriousness” and “can’t be something you pursue on the basis of vanity and ambition.”

“I’m not sure anyone is ready to be president before they’re president,” Obama said. "I trust the judgment of the American people.

“We have a long and rigorous process. Should I decide to run, if I ever did decide to run, I’ll be confident that I’ll be run through the paces pretty good,” Obama said.[/i]

So, thoughts anybody? Is Obama 2008 a good idea?

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008

I like this quote from the article:

[i]On Sunday, Obama dismissed notions that he might not be ready to run for president because of his limited experience in national politics. He agreed the job requires a “certain soberness and seriousness” and “can’t be something you pursue on the basis of vanity and ambition.”

“I’m not sure anyone is ready to be president before they’re president,” Obama said. "I trust the judgment of the American people.

“We have a long and rigorous process. Should I decide to run, if I ever did decide to run, I’ll be confident that I’ll be run through the paces pretty good,” Obama said.[/i]

So, thoughts anybody? Is Obama 2008 a good idea?[/quote]

Well, if he isn’t for ending government entitlement programs, and dramatically scaling back taxation (Consumption or Flat Tax reform would be nice)…

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Well, if he isn’t for ending government entitlement programs, and dramatically scaling back taxation (Consumption or Flat Tax reform would be nice)…

[/quote]
It’s my understanding that he helped engineer some serious tax cuts for Illinois residents.

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Well, if he isn’t for ending government entitlement programs, and dramatically scaling back taxation (Consumption or Flat Tax reform would be nice)…

It’s my understanding that he helped engineer some serious tax cuts for Illinois residents.

[/quote]

Heh, I’m just joking around a bit. Unless he’s planning to abolish government social programs the democrat canidate won’t matter to me. I hold my nose voting republican, as it is.

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Heh, I’m just joking around a bit. Unless he’s planning to abolish government social programs the democrat canidate won’t matter to me. I hold my nose voting republican, as it is.[/quote]

LOL Thus the libertarian thread. I’m telling ya guy, y’all need to start selling better! I could be convinced to vote libertarian if they got their act together and fielded a really good candidate, and the dems put up yet another stinker. Christ, between Kerry and Bush I held my nose just like you did. :slight_smile:

One thing about Obama is that he has been able to remain in the national eye without getting sucked into the Iraq war debate in a way that other national liberals have. I think that helps him. I mean, he has been in the media regarding Iraq - it’s just that he has been able to avoid being a victim or beneficiary of the ‘netroots’ wing of the Democratic party this whole time.

Can he win? I don’t know. He comes off as this election’s John Edwards.

One thing I do like about him is he comes off as a reasonably classy guy, and that could go a long way with voters - conservative, liberal, and centrist - who have grown weary of the state of affairs with both national parties.

Here is a look at some of his positions (and don’t let the name of the website fool you - it covers post-2000):

http://www.issues2000.org/Senate/Barack_Obama.htm

Thanks for that link, thunder. I had been poking around his web page, but your link was exactly what I had been looking for to figure this guy out.

Now having taken a peek, I must say that he sounds pretty good to me. I would have a serious problem with his stance on gun control, however. Also, his ideas on energy might not be realistic.

Still, not bad.

A real politics thread…cool.

The guy is an interesting canidate. Kenedyesque almost?

He hasn’t been tarnished by the stink of Washington yet. I think head to head he beats Hillary, Kerry doesn’t stand a chance against him. Can he win in the general election…who knows.

Personally I’d like to see him take a run at Governor first. He’s a young man and the experience will not hurt him at all. Congressman have had a tough time get elected president for a while now. Governors not so much.

He will have to modify his postion on Gun Control. The market has spoken on this. No major Democrat advocates it these days because it costs them at the polls. Obama needs to read the wind on this and change his position otherwise it’s an issue that will segment him away from moderates nationally.

I think he’d run strong in the NE and West. The South, I don’t think so. The South isn’t going for a Democrat anytime soon. Whether that’s enough to win remains to be seen.

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061023/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008

I like this quote from the article:

[i]On Sunday, Obama dismissed notions that he might not be ready to run for president because of his limited experience in national politics. He agreed the job requires a “certain soberness and seriousness” and “can’t be something you pursue on the basis of vanity and ambition.”

“I’m not sure anyone is ready to be president before they’re president,” Obama said. "I trust the judgment of the American people.

“We have a long and rigorous process. Should I decide to run, if I ever did decide to run, I’ll be confident that I’ll be run through the paces pretty good,” Obama said.[/i]

So, thoughts anybody? Is Obama 2008 a good idea?[/quote]

There have been several discussions about Obama on this board and this probably won’t be the last.

My $.02,

He hasn’t won any real election against any real opponent. In one of contemporary political histories biggest contradictions, the GOP in Illinois is as much a joke as the Democratic Party everywhere else. He is a dyed in the wool Democrat that has done a good job highlighting himself as a moderate/centrist.

It’ll be interesting to see what the nation thinks once a real knock-down, drag-out political battle happens. I just get the feeling the guy has something hidden that we haven’t seen yet or hasn’t been cast in a discerning light yet. That said, he is head and shoulders above his fellow democrats.

[quote]hedo wrote:

Personally I’d like to see him take a run at Governor first. He’s a young man and the experience will not hurt him at all. Congressman have had a tough time get elected president for a while now. Governors not so much.[/quote]

I think this would cost him momentum and not buy him a lot of ground. He could take the Gov. position in IL, but I think the future of that position is going to make just about any candidate look bad. But that’s his coin to flip and it looks like he’s going to take his time doing it.

I agree that this may be key. In IL, this plays well, but nationwide, things like allowing people to sue gun manufacturers and being rather ardently pro-choice makes him look like the ever-present anti-gun rights, anti-responsibility Democrat boogeyman that Rove & Co. has been so good at inflating.

[quote]lucasa wrote:
hedo wrote:

Personally I’d like to see him take a run at Governor first. He’s a young man and the experience will not hurt him at all. Congressman have had a tough time get elected president for a while now. Governors not so much.

I think this would cost him momentum and not buy him a lot of ground. He could take the Gov. position in IL, but I think the future of that position is going to make just about any candidate look bad. But that’s his coin to flip and it looks like he’s going to take his time doing it.

He will have to modify his postion on Gun Control. The market has spoken on this. No major Democrat advocates it these days because it costs them at the polls. Obama needs to read the wind on this and change his position otherwise it’s an issue that will segment him away from moderates nationally.

I agree that this may be key. In IL, this plays well, but nationwide, things like allowing people to sue gun manufacturers and being rather ardently pro-choice makes him look like the ever-present anti-gun rights, anti-responsibility Democrat boogeyman that Rove & Co. has been so good at inflating.

[/quote]

Momentum is key. Do you think he’s got the backing to defeat the other Dems that he is likely to face?

[quote]hedo wrote:

Momentum is key. Do you think he’s got the backing to defeat the other Dems that he is likely to face?[/quote]

I’m assuming you mean Pres. race and not a gubernatorial race. IMO, yes, I think he definitely draws from several relatively untapped voter pools that no other democrat draws from (or as well). I don’t think his voter base would be a problem, nor do I think other Dems would smear him horribly to beat him (I could be wrong).

The only way I see him failing to get the Democratic nomination for Pres. in the near future (<12 yrs.) is if he starts solving too many problems, acting too “non-partisan”, and gets Lieberated from the party. The only way I see him becoming Pres. in the future is if the GOP continues to flush it’s image down the crapper and he manages to keep his name in the news via the Senate. Only time will tell though…

I believe he is absolutely going to run in '08, and he is absolutely going to win. It’s just a feeling.

I like him a lot. Running for governor or something would take away momentum- his time is now. Besides that, he also is known for not being a grimy politician type, for staying outside of that. If he gets into politics at another level, that could change.

Obama has no chance, maybe as VP running with someone else, we’ll see who the establishment allows to run for the dems.

C’mon guys, this is not Colin Powell were talking about here, or Condi Rice. This is a black man with limited experience at the national level. While I’d happily vote for a proven leader, black or white, woman or man, Obama hasn’t got any experience as the head dude (or dudette) of anything.

I must admit though, it would be good to get rid of the Clinton’s once and for all.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
C’mon guys, this is not Colin Powell were talking about here, or Condi Rice. This is a black man with limited experience at the national level. While I’d happily vote for a proven leader, black or white, woman or man, Obama hasn’t got any experience as the head dude (or dudette) of anything.[/quote]

…and it’s not the Republican party we’re talking about here either. I really expected you to play the “Democrats’ token” card. :slight_smile:

See? He may not be the most seasoned candidate, but he’s not the (wurst) talking head/skeleton closet that embodies most of the rest of the party. The democrats would be stupid not to grant him the nomination.

Looking through a few of his positions:

  1. Voted NO on $40B in reduced federal overall spending. (Dec 2005): could hurt him, although it depends on how his opponent looked on this issue. Many Americans are outraged at the drunken sailor spending of the government, and Obama didn’t support a cut when he had a chance. But again, this may be measured through the lens of his opponent.

  2. Energy approach is nice, but comes off as too idealistic.

  3. Gun control issue may be too far afield.

  4. Someone could raise the charge he changed his vote on the Patriot Act to position himself for a presidential run. Maybe.

  5. Will have to defend the whole “I authorized the war but wish I didn’t” approach

Not a bad candidate in terms of personality and character (refreshing), but are his politics centrist enough to win a general election?

[quote]lucasa wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
C’mon guys, this is not Colin Powell were talking about here, or Condi Rice. This is a black man with limited experience at the national level. While I’d happily vote for a proven leader, black or white, woman or man, Obama hasn’t got any experience as the head dude (or dudette) of anything.

…and it’s not the Republican party we’re talking about here either. I really expected you to play the “Democrats’ token” card. :slight_smile:

[/quote]

Nah, the Dems are the rascists. They created Nanny-government, knowing that poverty was epidemic in the black community, to capture and control a voting block. Under the guise of extending a helping hand (LOL!), they created a dependency class and the entitlement mentality. As if politicians (esp Dems) actually wanted to help the black community! LMAO!

“I’ll have then ni##ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years!”
— LBJ

One of my favorite quotes, which I use as a reminder, when I listen to a bleeding-heart liberal.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

Nah, the Dems are the rascists. They created Nanny-government, knowing that poverty was epidemic in the black community, to capture and control a voting block. Under the guise of extending a helping hand (LOL!), they created a dependency class and the entitlement mentality. As if politicians (esp Dems) actually wanted to help the black community! LMAO!

“I’ll have then ni##ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years!”
— LBJ

One of my favorite quotes, which I use as a reminder, when I listen to a bleeding-heart liberal.

[/quote]
My favorite:

“We have just lost the South for a generation.” LBJ after signing the civil rights(opposite of racist) act.

Odd that those are all red states.

In other words you (and Rush) will always be debunked by reality.

Still waiting for the conservative agenda to turn Alabama around…
(and yes it stinks that my blue state taxes have to pay for those darned red state dependents)

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
lucasa wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
C’mon guys, this is not Colin Powell were talking about here, or Condi Rice. This is a black man with limited experience at the national level. While I’d happily vote for a proven leader, black or white, woman or man, Obama hasn’t got any experience as the head dude (or dudette) of anything.

…and it’s not the Republican party we’re talking about here either. I really expected you to play the “Democrats’ token” card. :slight_smile:

Nah, the Dems are the rascists. They created Nanny-government, knowing that poverty was epidemic in the black community, to capture and control a voting block. Under the guise of extending a helping hand (LOL!), they created a dependency class and the entitlement mentality. As if politicians (esp Dems) actually wanted to help the black community! LMAO!

“I’ll have then ni##ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years!”
— LBJ

One of my favorite quotes, which I use as a reminder, when I listen to a bleeding-heart liberal.

[/quote]

And I’m the one smoking dope huh? You’re way more delusional than I ever am.