Romney's dropped out. McCain's going to get the nomination. Uh, that's delightful. I'm praying for this to dissatisfy conservatives enough that there's a real break in the party, a third party to be really divisive, perhaps?

*despairs*

Wtf, why should it matter if its Obama or Hilary if you're a republican. You're going to vote for Mccain either way.

Oh and btw, I'm just going to say, there is about 0.000001% chance that the republicans will win when it comes November.

Please stop posting. The ignorant, rash conclusions that you're drawing are killing me.

Man, thats too bad.

Yeah. I do pity stupid people.

Are you serious?

Its pretty pathetic to pity yourself, but whatever floats your boat.

Yes.

Fail.

Usually a picture follows up, so let me help.




But whatever makes you happy eh?

Actually, I didn't. But I was a poll election officer and I was bored out of my mind.


I think like...100 of those went to Clinton. :/ Yes we had to count all the stupid ballots. GOD AND WE'RE UNDERPAID TOO!!!

Obama is unelectable due to his extreme stances on issues such as abortion. I can't wait to see him try to explain why he voted against the partial birth abortion ban in front of a crowd that doesn't consist entirely of the BAAAAA BAAAAAAAA OBAAAAAAAMA sheep. Or try to explain how he has more absent/nonvotes in the senate than Hilary Clinton despite being in the senate only half as long. The only reason he's even relevant at this time is he ran against a poorly conducted Illinois Republican Senatorial campaign, where the original guy had to drop out and they drafted who to run against him... Alan Keyes.

(Not that I'm totally against what Alan Keyes stands for, but let's face it, he has a terrible track record as a politician, he's a black conservative so he can't even count on the black vote, he can't raise any money, and he's probably better off getting his old cable opinion news show back.)

Hilary Clinton will probably get the nomination, but is unelectable because she's Hilary Clinton.

I'm not sure if I'd vote for McCain, but he's tolerable, at least compared to Hilary and Obama. I could see him taking Huckabee as his running mate, assuming he wins. Again, not a ticket I'm excited to vote for, but there's plenty of time to think about it.

If things keep going the way they are, we're going to see another Republican in the White House. The Dems lost the White House because they passed stupid bullshit like the Federal AWB, something which house Democrats warned Bill Clinton of when it was still a bill. In the two years that they've regained control of Congress, they've been too much of pussies to get anything done and prove to America that they deserve there, instead choosing to spend their time voting on more vacation days and non binding resolutions that do absolutely nothing.

Not to mention the only reason the Dems regained control in the first place was because they ran moderate to conservative people, like Bob Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania. If they're going to nominate extreme people like Obama, who is even further left than NARAL Pro Choice America and his own party leadership (Clinton is not that far behind herself), they can kiss the moderates goodbye just like they did in 1996.

most partial birth abortions are done for medical reasons anyway. if my wife's life was in danger because of medical reasons during her pregnancy, and we wanted to get an abortion rather than her risk her life, why shouldn't that be ok? why should the government be making that harder? it's her life and her body.

it's not that i'm "for" partial birth abortions, or any abortion really, but i'm definitely NOT for the government telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies.

Is it her own body though? Partial Birth Abortions happen relatively late in the pregnancy. Can you justify cracking a baby's head open, and then sucking the brain out with a vacuum as a choice that a woman has the right to make? Does the woman really have the right to decide whether the baby- which is no longer "just a clump of cells," and can survive out side the womb- lives or dies?

At that stage in the game, I think it's undeniable that it's a human being, and she has no right to allow the doctor to do such a barbaric thing.

yeah, if the woman's life is in danger then i absolutely think it's justified. if i was in that position where it's my baby's life or my wife's...yeah that would be a really hard choice, but it should still be our choice, not the governments.

You've just said that it's the woman's right to order the slaughter of another human being.

Your rights end where another person begins. Since you've acknowledged that the baby is a person, yet you still think that the government has no right to enforce the law (since murder is against the law, right?)?

To be honest, I think that's morally indefensible, and it will not go over well with moderate democrats and independents. That is why Obama cannot win. The Republican political machine only has to inform America of this fact and how many SCOTUS judges are at stake.

the government has the right to take a woman's life?



the government gets to choose that my wife should die?


i think the best thing the government can do is stay out of personal lives. they don't honestly care what happens in that situation. they don't care about my wife, my child, or me. they don't have to deal with after effects of all that either. how can someone who doesn't know me, my family, or our situation make a decision like that for me? that's crazy to me.

The government isn't taking away the woman's life, her medical condition is. The government is not killing you by telling you that you can't kill a baby.

Your wife does not have a 100% chance of dying by delivering the baby. Nor does having the abortion mean that she's going to have a 100% chance of survival. I'm pretty sure the baby has a 100% chance of dying by cracking its skull and sucking its brains out.

Two wrongs do not make a right. In fact, unless your wife was raped (which in that case, what took you so long to decide to abort?), there's only one wrong being committed here: the partial birth abortion. If two wrongs don't make a right, how does one wrong make a right? I really don't follow the logic.

I'm with you that the consequences might suck, but that doesn't make it morally justifiable.

I'm with you though that the government should play less of a part on our personal lives. Obama doesn't seem to agree. He's pro gun control, pro public health care, all in all, bigger government and higher taxes.

In my English class we have to write a paper on one of the canididates and I'm writing mine on Obama, and all the money he wants to spend worries me. He's a very good public speaker, though, and I think that's why a lot of people really like him. But spending all that money to rebuild Iraq, healthcare costs, medical research.

Primaries here are the 19th, so we'll see.

i suppose we just agree to disagree. i still have a problem with that being the government's choice and not the mother and father who are actually involved.

Oh, I disagree.

I think it's easily solved. Can one human being legally murder another, innocent, human being?

The answer is no.

It is not the government choosing for the mother to die. It is the government saying this is sick and twisted and should never have been a choice in the first place. It's not even really a new law if you think about it, it's just reinforcing the idea that murder is wrong, and that PBA is murder. No rights are being taken away because no one ever had the legal choice to murder.

Let's face it, people die. But that does not give people the right to kill other people in order, not even to guarantee survival, but only to increase their chance of survival.

Except that elections aren't determined on one issue alone. I don't agree with partial birth abortion, and that didn't stop me from voting for him in the primary.

... Independent voters and moderates. In swing states.

Being absolutely wrong on one issue tends to make them not vote for you. And you kinda need them to vote for you to win elections.