On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:41:26 -0500, HK wrote:


I was surprised but not displeased by Obama's win in Iowa. He's a very
appealing guy, and articulate. My fear is that despite his qualities, in
a general election, whitey isn't going to vote for "the black guy."

Some whiteys, perhaps, but Iowa is 2.5% black. There were a lot of white
people who caucused for him. While I think it's silly, I've heard more
grumbles about Romney's Mormon religion, than I have about Obama being
black, or Hillary being female.

"HK" wrote in message
. ..


I was surprised but not displeased by Obama's win in Iowa. He's a very
appealing guy, and articulate. My fear is that despite his qualities, in a
general election, whitey isn't going to vote for "the black guy."




I think your age is showing Harry. Things have changed, and for the better.
The young crowd really don't have the remnants of racial prejudices that
many in our generation still harbor.

BTW ... I snipped the rest of your post, but have a request (that you will
probably ignore, but I'll ask anyway).

How about offering positive points for the candidate or party of your choice
rather than the usual, demeaning, insulting and negative comments of those
you don't support? Your influence would be far more credible.

Eisboch

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:41:26 -0500, HK wrote:

My fear is that despite his qualities, in
a general election, whitey isn't going to vote for "the black guy."

Many knowledgable people said that about Iowa also, including quite a
few Iowans.

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 11:34:43 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:


Yep - that one surprized me that's for sure. What interests me is
that Huckabee would be the ideal Democrat candidate. What he proposes
isn't conservative Republican in any sense of the word. I think he
was selected on the strength of his faith and his pro-life stance - in
ever other aspect, he's a Democrat.

He was selected because he exudes decency and leadership.
There is no such thing as "conservative Republican." That's a term
ideologues use for different purposes, and with different motives.
Don't know what kind of Prez he would be, but I like Huckabee.
I'm not religious, but have no fear of Huckabee.
We share many values.
*Any* major candidate of either party - excepting Guiliani - will be a
vast improvement over those currently in power.
The only one that gives me pause is Obama, because he might have
Snoop Doggy Dog performing at White House events that I could stumble
upon watching television. I generally don't like rap music.

--Vic

Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 11:34:43 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:


Yep - that one surprized me that's for sure. What interests me is
that Huckabee would be the ideal Democrat candidate. What he proposes
isn't conservative Republican in any sense of the word. I think he
was selected on the strength of his faith and his pro-life stance - in
ever other aspect, he's a Democrat.

He was selected because he exudes decency and leadership.
There is no such thing as "conservative Republican." That's a term
ideologues use for different purposes, and with different motives.
Don't know what kind of Prez he would be, but I like Huckabee.
I'm not religious, but have no fear of Huckabee.
We share many values.
*Any* major candidate of either party - excepting Guiliani - will be a
vast improvement over those currently in power.
The only one that gives me pause is Obama, because he might have
Snoop Doggy Dog performing at White House events that I could stumble
upon watching television. I generally don't like rap music.

Snoop Dog usually has some interesting women following him.

On Jan 3, 9:42*pm, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 13:00:17 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing

wrote:
I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two.

Did I call that one right or what?

No. It was Obama, then Clinton the Edwards. Clinton and Edwards were a
fair distance apart.

On Jan 2, 8:00*am, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Here's what I'm thinking just based on reading things here and there.

Democrats favor Obama, then Edwards, then Clinton, then everybody
else.

I'm thinking Obama gets out with a lead of three or four points over
Edwards in second and Clinton a very close third to Edwards - say
within a point or two. *Everybody else, Dodd, Biden, Krazyinich will
all slide to less than 4% of the vote in total.

Republicans - I'm thnking Romney with an insigificant lead over
Huckabee and Thompson a strong third. *Ron Paultard will show a
surprising 13% of the vote from all the Paulbots that show up from
other states.

Now I need to call my bookie. *:)

Man, you munged that up!