Fences to Mend
June 5th, 2008 at 05:50pm Geoff
This cements the fact that Sen. Obama and his confederates have some fences to mend with women voters who feel a bit jilted at the manner in which Sen. Clinton was treated in the now (finally) late primary race. Heck, in the South Sound newspaper yesterday–the day after Sen. Obama officially clinched–two of the five letters were from angry female Clinton supporters pledging in no uncertain terms to withold their support from Sen. Obama this fall.
Were this sentiment to hold among enough women voters, Sen. Obama would be in considerable trouble. He doesn’t just need some or most of these alienated voters to come around, he darn near needs all of them to. After all, the Democratic Party is the “Mommy Party” and it will be hard-pressed to win if mommy ends up voting with daddy for Sen. McCain.
Entry Filed under: Uncategorized
16 Comments
1. Eric T | June 5th, 2008 at 6:20 pm
Maybe the McCain team should have Cindy McCain do some T.V ads that address womens issues and things like Social Security and stuff like that so the women understand that the Republican party is not neglecting them in anyway.
( You could have a clip of suicide bombers in Tel Aviv taking out a grocery store)
It might sound extreme but, Our troops are fighting the terrorist abroad, to keep our women and children safe here.
Obama will surrender to Al Qaida in Iraq, allow terrorists to enter our country thru our open borders, give them amnesty, Back down to Iran and other sponsors of terror. Obama will make sure you can not defend yourself here with all that anti-gun stuff in his record. He is going to raise your taxes, he is the change we don’t need.
2. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Maybe the McCain team should have Cindy McCain do some T.V ads that address womens issues and things like Social Security and stuff like that so the women understand that the Republican party is not neglecting them in anyway.
Oh yeah… cause Cindy McCain would really reasonate with the average woman.
( You could have a clip of suicide bombers in Tel Aviv taking out a grocery store)
It might sound extreme but, Our troops are fighting the terrorist abroad, to keep our women and children safe here.
Are you freaking kidding me? You really want to have an ad with a suicide bomber in it???? That wouldn’t be fear mongering or anything? Although if you do that, you would certainly reinforce the 28% that still support the war.
Hey… did you guys read that the Iraqi Parliament wants us out?
Obama will surrender to Al Qaida in Iraq, allow terrorists to enter our country thru our open borders, give them amnesty, Back down to Iran and other sponsors of terror.
Nope… no fear mongering there at all. Eric, you might want to start hiding under your bed!!!
Obama will make sure you can not defend yourself here with all that anti-gun stuff in his record
Haven’t we already discussed this before? Nobody is taking away your damn guns. That issue is done. The NRA won. You can breathe easy. Your guns are safe.
Back down to Iran? How so? By talking to them? Do you want us to start bombing? Ignoring them isn’t going to deter anything. Read about what Obama proposes on Iran before making a statement based on something Rush pounds into your head.
Raise taxes? Yep… if you are in the top 5%. If you are, then you have a complaint. If you aren’t, then you should be happy about this since it will benefit you and the other 95% of the country. Which is more than what has happened over the last 8 years where the middle class has shrunk and started paying more and more. Maybe not in direct taxes but in everything else.
3. Eric T | June 6th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Joe-
The NRA did’nt win, it is not done, When you look at Hillary or Obama’s record on guns it is awful, just terrible, look into it, With a record like his, this guy will probably even try to take your blackpowder guns, and even your bow and arrows, hunting knifes.
You wanna see an impressive record on guns look at John McCain’s record.
4. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Eric,
When I say the NRA won, I mean nobody is trying to take away guns at this point.
Guns are about 30th on the list of the 25 most important things to deal with.
You even bring up things in other posts that are so much more important.
The economy
Iraq
Iran
Foreclosures
Jobs going overseas
Taxes
Healthcare
Gas prices
Environment
Social Security
Deficits
Stealing our personal freedoms (not guns)
And on and on and on. So just like abortion, nothing will be done about guns. So don’t sweat it.
5. Eric T | June 6th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Joe-
Everyone has different important issues to them.
Good paying jobs is probably the most important issue to everyone.
You mentioned jobs going overseas, the unemployment rate has risen to 5.5%
Michigan is quite a bit higher from the national average, because of outsourcing auto manufacturing jobs.
What is the solution?
Mine would be slow down immigration, and make it a little more difficult to allow corporations to ship products made overseas back to the U.S. Cut some breaks to companies adding jobs here in the U.S.
The unemployment rate now is really not that bad. If you think it is and want try and hit 3% or 4% unemployment. Any of this stuff can be done, Obama is just not the right guy to be calling the shots
6. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Eric T,
If you are that concerned about jobs (and you most certainly should be, especially in Michigan), then get past the gun issue (nothing is going to happen there anyway) and vote Democratic.
Check out non-Right-wing websites and learn McCain’s record with the AFL-CIO and other unions.
Do yourself and the country a favor and vote for your own best interests and not just one minor thing (guns).
7. Eric T | June 6th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Obama talks about how bad the U.S image is and how we are hated around the world. How is it going to look to Canada and Mexico when Obama says, this NAFTA deal is no longer valid?
It surely has had some bad effects on my state, but many of us felt the affects when Clinton passed it.
Alot of Oil comes from mexico and canada, It is a big issue, Obama might ruin trade relations and send oil to $900.00 a barrel, the price is flying today and market is going into the toilet,
8. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
I didn’t like NAFTA when Clinton passed it either.
How is it going to look to Canada and Mexico when Obama says, this NAFTA deal is no longer valid?
I don’t know… but it is worth negotiating, wouldn’t you agree? McCain is actually supporting these and wants more free trade pacts with other countries. Is that what you want???
By the way… no matter what happens with NAFTA, the relationships of the US, Canada and Mexico would never be so bad that you would see $900 a barrel of oil.
All of your comments so far (excelpt for guns) points to the fact that you SHOULD BE voting Democratic.
9. Eric T | June 6th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Joe -
The democrats are not the same Andrew Jackson style party of the working class that they were at one time. Read Bloomberg, you will hear the fiscal progressives, talk of the joys of NAFTA, outsourcing, and all that gung-ho capitalist stuff that makes the blue collar guy worry when he reads it because he KNOWS he will be working for the wages they pay in Mexico or China soon.
Is Obama really for the people and telling people what he thinks they wanna hear? is he going to cater to billionares like George Soros, and these real rich corporate democrats that are funding his campaign. Nationalizing Oil companies and some of these Obama ideas are power grabs, imagine Exxon gets privatized, no more publically traded stock, the people will not be able to share the profits anymore, it becomes a company like Citgo where all the money goes to directly to Chavez. This kinda stuff will benefit certain folks (the owners).
Pelosi and the 2006 democrats have not done anything to address the issues of the working class that stand out in my mind. I really don’t think they need full control of the government
The Bush tax rebate checks, I remember, they helped, the John McCain gas tax relief is something that actually could make a difference.
Mike Huckabee had Union Endorsements. Duncan Hunter, Fred Thompson, and some other Republicans have labor friendly attitude, others don’t.
10. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Eric T,
in a thread on BlogsforVictory, you asked this question:
“when have we heard Pelosi, making a bill to keep jobs from getting outsourced”
Here is your answer………
H.R. 2759: Fighting for American Jobs Act of 2007
To prohibit business enterprises that lay-off a greater percentage of their United States workers than workers in other countries from receiving any Federal assistance, and for other purposes.
Sponsor - Rep Visclosky (D-IN)
Co-sponsors -
Rep Grijalva (D-AZ)
Rep Kildee (D-MI)
Rep Kaptur (D-OH)
Rep Kucinich (D-OH)
Rep Paul (R-TX)
As part of your question above, you add this:
…or a bill to make energy more affordable”
Here is your answer…..
I would post this on the BlogsforVictory site, but for some reason Mark doesn’t allow me to post any longer. I don’t think he liked facts.
11. Joe | June 6th, 2008 at 8:56 pm
Nationalizing Oil companies and some of these Obama ideas are power grabs, imagine Exxon gets privatized, no more publically traded stock, the people will not be able to share the profits anymore, it becomes a company like Citgo where all the money goes to directly to Chavez. This kinda stuff will benefit certain folks (the owners).
— Please point to anything that indicates Obama would nationalize oil. Anything at all.
The Bush tax rebate checks, I remember, they helped, the John McCain gas tax relief is something that actually could make a difference.
— The “Bush tax rebate checks”?????? That was a joint effort/compromise of Bush and the Dems in Congress. In fact… you got more in that check THANKS TO THE DEMOCRATS.
The McCain gas tax holiday? You didn’t fall for that did you? Seriously do the math on that. Between Memorial Day and Labor Day the average person would save $35. $35 dollars.
Tell me how exactly that is going to make a difference. That is pandering to those that don’t want to do the math.
I’ll help.
Assume it is 12 weeks (4 weeks over 3 months).
Assume you fill up once a week.
Assume your fillup is 15 gallons.
You would save 18 cents per gallon.
That is $2.70 per fill up.
12 fillups gets you $32.40
Now explain what that is going to do for you.
12. Eric T | June 7th, 2008 at 6:37 am
Joe-
With the gas tax, lets say you drive more than the miles you state or plan on taking a long trip where you travel out of state for vacation?
That gas price is too high anything that helps you think would be welcomed, Obama seems more concerned with the effect it will have on government spending.
That HR 2759 - that’s got Ron Paul on it! that looks like a great bill. Joe, I admit I was wrong and you got me on this one. I think this race will boil down to who is going to do what is best for the American People, sometimes the democrats may some decent ideas, but If they have complete control of all houses, they will get Powermad. Start taking away peoples guns, forcing gay marriage, you know the list, the stuff we have talked about a million times on the other blog.
13. Joe | June 7th, 2008 at 7:17 am
Well… say you fill up twice a week instead of once. Then you save $64.80. Say you fill up 3 times a week. You save $97.20.
Say you drive cross country on a vacation. Maybe that gets you up to $100 or $125. Still… it is welcomed, but isn’t going to help all that much.
Another issue is if people think they can drive so much more because of the savings, then prices just go up the 18 cents you are saving. Net-net, you get squat.
I’m not saying the GOP never has any good plans and the Dems don’t ever have bad plans. I’m just saying that the non-social (guns, gay marriage and abortion) things you are concerned about are better addressed by Dem plans.
I understand you are concerned about those social issues, but nothing is going to get done with those issues regardless who is in control. Heck, the GOP had control of everything for 6 yrs and did nothing about them.
Having said that, to vote your wallet and to vote what affects you… Dem appears to be the way to go. Think about it.
14. Eric T | June 7th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Joe- I probably gotta spend some more time studying Obama’s platform, so I don’t lay out something that is not true about him.
But “vote your Wallet?” The tax masters in my state raised my taxes on my house when the value is falling thru the floor, smokes up here are $5.50-6.00 bucks a pack, down south less than half that.
If I wanted a Union Job I could go down the street work for the Teamsters and make a few bucks an hour more. But I don’t think that would change with McCain or Obama. Teamsters will still be there and so will my non-union job.
I think if I could live in any time period, I’d go back to the Eisenhower era. A guy could work a job, his wife could stay home and raise a family, now a days the inflation has made it difficult to do that.
I think Obama is too green and still wet behind the ears, I think he needs years of practice to be President.
Obama has alot of big plans, the costs WILL get passed on to us, nothing is free, Obama wants more government programs, which, all the cost will be way underestimated now, kinda like the war, but once half way into these great new programs taxes are gonna have to be raised on everything.
Unless he is just gonna use George Soros’s money to pay for everything, were all gonna get stuck paying for it.
I think Medicare, Social Security, and Military account for the largest parts of the budget. You wanna put some new cash guzzling plans in there. You should be saying “Hold on to your wallet” just pass on Obama.
I’ll vote FREEDOM over my wallet anyway, I ain’t trading in my guns for something Obama, Ted Kennedy, Feinstein, Schumer, or Clinton promise. It will be some cheesy diversity, affimative action type program, that will disqualify me anyway because I’m not a minority, the wallets of democrat special interest will be the only ones that beneifit from that vote.
Take it easy, Joe
15. Geoff | June 8th, 2008 at 2:34 am
You two ought to get your own cable news network show : )
16. DM | June 12th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Joe,
I think your example while accurate to some degree on a simple level, it misses the bigger picture.
Wouldn’t there also be a ripple affect for businesses, truckers and haulers, delivery companies like UPS and FedEx, public transportation, school busses, cab drivers, air travel, pizza delivery etc… We pay for all those things either directly or indirectly. Aside from our personal direct savings wouldn’t we also achieve savings where the price of consumer goods and services would diminish because the costs of moving those goods and providing those services were reduced?
Also, as the cost of fuel rises people curtail their travels where certain industries would see a negative impact. For example with less vacation travel there’d also be less hotel, restaurant, amusement park, clothes and trinket expenditures and the like – yes? What is the impact on this loss of business income and how might it affect jobs and factory production?
Even small fluctuations can have enough impact on business that the consumers would likely gain savings beyond the dollars you mention. We see the impact on those goods and services when fuel costs go up. It stands to reason that we’d see similar savings when fuel costs go down. Care to guess what the savings would be looking at the bigger picture?