Obama vs Clinton

Discussion in 'General Off-Topic Chat' started by amptor, Feb 7, 2008.

Feb 7, 2008

Obama vs Clinton by amptor at 9:49 PM (4,560 Views / 0 Likes) 59 replies

  1. amptor
    OP

    Banned amptor Banned

    Joined:
    May 2, 2003
    Messages:
    2,554
    Country:
    United States
    Ok well I just looked around on the internet for which supports Bush more and came up with some startling findings.

    Now, what I ask you guys is what is true. These internet sites I read stories that show that the Clinton family has strong ties with the Bush family and actually helps hide them after they commit illegal acts are coming from sites that are not necessarily what in college would be coined as "reliable sources".

    So I am confused. If I type in something like "Obama ties to bush" it comes up with nothing more than him being very distantly related to some former presidents including Bush. And this information is entirely irrelevant because I know that I've had great great uncles and such that I don't know anything at all about, I don't even know if they are still alive. I found out that one owned a car dealership within drivable distance of me. I didn't even know I had relatives in this state. See what I'm getting at?

    Which one is best for the office? I'm a bit confused. I was going to go with Clinton but their family has been involved in scandals in the past. Obama looks like a clean slate, but maybe he isn't as strong of a leader as Clinton? He seems smart enough for a job as a politician. I'm thinking about swaying toward Obama but I wonder if anyone here knows if there's more than meets the eye to either politician.

    On the other hand about Clinton, it's a different human being this time so maybe she could pull it off. It's tough to say, I dunno how this stuff works. I'm definitely not voting for a republican.
     


  2. Skye07

    Member Skye07 GBAtemp Fan

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2006
    Messages:
    450
    Location:
    Belgium
    Country:
    Belgium
    Well if Clinton becomes president, one thing we know for certain, there won't be any Monica Lewinsky stuff going on, unless she's a lesbian [​IMG]

    To be honest, I don't really follow who does what but somehow I'm siding with Clinton rather than Obama, I just don't like his attitude.
     
  3. xalphax

    Member xalphax Internet killed the Ponystar.

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2006
    Messages:
    1,266
    Location:
    here'n'there
    Country:
    Croatia
    either better than bush.
     
  4. j5c077

    Member j5c077 dood

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Messages:
    236
    Country:
    United States
    dont vote for either

    theyre both idiots
     
  5. Ace Gunman

    Former Staff Ace Gunman ~••Lucky҉Shot••~

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    6,385
    Location:
    Wassamatta U
    Country:
    Canada
    There's always more than meets the eye to politicians. They all lie, cheat, steal, etc. It's all just a judgment call as to who you think is the lesser of two evils. This is my perspective on the matter:

    Obama's younger, and more liberal than Clinton. He could be a real force for change and a new era for the US government. However he and Clinton share most of the same policies, and really when it comes down to the hard issues, they're of the same mind. Clinton though, well, she was the force behind the previous Clinton administration. Bill was her puppet, and she got things done. The original Clinton administration was hugely successful; and gave the US a new era of economic prosperity. She has the experience, but her outlook hasn't exactly mellowed with time. She's the most conservative liberal you'll ever meet.

    Now while I think either one would make a fine president, the issue that sways me towards Obama is censorship. Clinton has a very rigid stance on the matter, she wants to completely retool and censor video games, movies, TV shows, and so on. Whereas Obama is of the mind that content shouldn't be touched, instead that parents should be properly educated rather than the majority being forced to suffer due to parental guidelines. Basically Clinton wants censor, and Obama wants to teach parents how to better moderate their own children's viewing/playing habits.

    So really the deciding factor for any liberal voter should be: how do you feel about video game censorship? Should everyone suffer just because certain parents allow their 5 year olds to play Leisure Suite Larry? The rest of their stances are very, very similar. You can't go wrong with either candidate, but my guess is that Hillary will be the winner. Hopefully, however, she takes Obama as her running mate; because they're the ideal democratic ticket.
     
  6. Westside

    Member Westside Sogdiana

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2004
    Messages:
    2,905
    Location:
    Guantanamo bay
    Country:
    Uzbekistan
    What? Then wait for McCain to win?
     
  7. jgu1994

    Member jgu1994 GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Messages:
    898
    Location:
    Earth
    Country:
    United States
    QFT
     
  8. cubin'

    Member cubin' GBAtemp Advanced Maniac

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,866
    Country:
    Australia
    I like Obama much better because he seems a little more real and also seems like he will keep his promises. He won't win because he's black. Lots of people in America are racists even though they don't think so. He seems like he's a really smart bloke and hasn't been corrupted yet. (lots of Australians are racist too btw)

    Clinton is a woman. She's cried on numerous occasions in public and even though I have no problems with crying I don't think it's wise to have someone who might start crying in front of world leaders. She can also have periods which will effect her judgment (no offense girls it's just not quite time for woman to be that high up yet IMO) I do think it's important to have a woman president in the next decade or so however..but lets have a black one first.

    (I'm far from an expert on these matters just watch the American news channel a few times a week)
     
  9. Ace Gunman

    Former Staff Ace Gunman ~••Lucky҉Shot••~

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    6,385
    Location:
    Wassamatta U
    Country:
    Canada
    [​IMG] Uhhh... no offense? Even I'm offended by that. That's one of the top 10 most offensive things I've ever heard.
     
  10. cubin'

    Member cubin' GBAtemp Advanced Maniac

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,866
    Country:
    Australia
    lol. Yeah maybe I went a little far with that but periods do effect woman quite strongly. If anyone lives with a female they'd know this. Maybe I'm a little sexist I just don't think a woman would make a good president yet.

    Mind you I'd rather Clinton be president than half the other idiots who are running.
     
  11. silent sniper

    Member silent sniper !dennaB

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,392
    Location:
    Vancouver, Canada
    Country:
    Canada
    i'd have to go with obama, mainly because the US government needs change and I think obama can give good change.
     
  12. Ace Gunman

    Former Staff Ace Gunman ~••Lucky҉Shot••~

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2003
    Messages:
    6,385
    Location:
    Wassamatta U
    Country:
    Canada
    Well... at least you put it politely and can admit you might have a bit of a problem in that area. That's better than a lot of people. And it's also the first step towards moving past your preconceived notions (some day).
     
  13. Urza

    Member Urza hi

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    6,493
    Country:
    United States
    Which means nothing.


    In related news, they're both speaking here in Washington tomorrow, so I'll be in Seattle all day. I've got a humdinger of a question for Obama if I get the chance to ask it.
     
  14. Mewgia

    Member Mewgia drifter

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2006
    Messages:
    2,161
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    Country:
    United States
    it's true though. The menstrual cycle can affect a woman's judgment, however at Clinton's age I doubt it really matters any more. There have been plenty of female leaders in other countries that were fine anyway.


    Also, Obama is better since he: doesn't change his stances all the time; doesn't cry when he starts losing poll points; doesn't believe in mudslinging to make himself look better; has much more of a sympathy for society's lowest (the impoverished and such) since he used to be in all of that; is supported by the Pirate Party because he has the best stances on Net Nuetrality, taking away the DMCA (put in place by the Clinton administration); ect ect.
     
  15. Foie

    Member Foie That one guy

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    867
    Location:
    Clackamas, Oregon
    Country:
    United States
    Now that Mitt Romney dropped out of the primaries, every candidate is going to be a horrible president.
     
  16. Urza

    Member Urza hi

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    6,493
    Country:
    United States
    If thats not sarcasm, I will lol at your expense.
     
  17. j5c077

    Member j5c077 dood

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2003
    Messages:
    236
    Country:
    United States
  18. Verocity

    Member Verocity Ö!

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2006
    Messages:
    727
    Location:
    Georgia
    Country:
    United States
    The problem is...they all suck.

    If Al Gore ran again he would win hands down.

    And on the quiz I got 68% relevant to Obama.
     
  19. notnarb

    Member notnarb Not narbing it up

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,086
    Country:
    Ron Fucking Paul. TAXES ON TIPS ARE AN OUTRAGE
     
  20. ridgecity

    Member ridgecity GBAtemp Advanced Fan

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2002
    Messages:
    759
    Country:
    Mexico
    Al Gore sucks too, he already was vice-president yet, he never did anything pro-enviroment and all he was famous for was saying everywhere he invented the internet. Just because he might have been a better choice than Bush doesn't make him any good, the current president probably is in the 3 worst in 200 years.

    and believe me. Mexico was never being considered during north american treaties, yet thanks to Bush, Mexico is considered in the top 5 most powerful countries in the world, something that since the 1940's no one even joked about. I guess you Mexico leveled up with U.S.A. [​IMG]

    Edit: Posts merged together, don't double post. [​IMG] - Ace
     

Share This Page