• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!



TRIBE Member
Sure it's been front and center on all sources of media, but why wouldn't it be. The nation with the biggest nuclear arsenal is choosing who's finger will be on the button, no wonder it's head line news.

I'm glad to see Guliani gone. His stance on foreign policy was by far the worst of the Republican lot.

Now if only Hucabee will go the same way. As much as he seems like the type of guy you'd want to be your neighbor, to have over for beers and a BBQ, he should never be in the white house. His stance on foreign policy is uninformed and just plain dumb. This would probably be a bad thing for a country with so many troops deployed.

What are the feelings on Hillary vs. Obama? I don't know enough to have a preference.


TRIBE Member
atbell said:
What are the feelings on Hillary vs. Obama? I don't know enough to have a preference.
Well, to be honest, I think when it comes to policy matters there isn't all that much difference between the two on health care and even foreign policy (despite their differences on Iraq). So it comes down to a few questions:

Which one of the two has the advantage in personality and tone?

Which one of the two will be harder for the Repugnants to beat?

Which one of the two will be able to bring the greatest degree of consensus in policy-making?

Which one of the two will have the best "team" behind them once in office?

And to me, I think Obama beats Hillary on every one of those questions. Hillary has a lot of baggage, and she's a lightning rod for the Repugnants, I really think she would fare worse in a general election against McCain than Obama would, despite what the pollsters have decided to glean from the % of the white vote Obama got in Florida and South Carolina (funny - in all the talk of how he's "vulnerable" on this score, what about white-bread Iowa where he carried the whitest of lily-white counties??).

I think Hillary would not change all that much on the hyper-partisan score either, whereas Obama has more appeal to centrist Repugnants and independents than she does.

We should also all try to remember - we're coming back from the abyss. Let's say Obama is President - we'll still have to deal with a Repugnant legacy that has managed quite successfully to frame most of the key debates, especially on foreign policy. Even if the Dems take all branches in the fall, that's not gonna do much with regards to the Repugnant echo chamber either. My point here mainly is just to say that before we can go from hard-line Repugnant policy to its opposite, there will be a transition period. As much as things will change under Hillary or Obama, its going to take maybe a few presidencies before the last vestiges of this dark time can be expunged completely...

In my opinion, Obama can take us further towards that end than Hillary.


TRIBE Member
What's your dream ticket peeps?

For me: Obama/Webb. Everytime I think of this combo I touch myself.

Who would you like to see as Vice for your preferred candidate?


TRIBE Member
I found this post from another forum which brings up a few good points about the two:

Lebezniatnikov co. Tranceaddict said:
She's been involved in national politics for considerably longer.

Four extra years in the Senate means she was a more highly-ranking member of a number of committees, and eight years living in the White House, no matter what her role actually was, gives her pretty good insight into the responsibilities and challenges of the office of the President. Before that she was the first lady of a state for about 12 years, so she has a pretty good idea of the roles and responsibilities of the gubernatorial office as well. During all that time she has advocated for and helped write some major policy proposals, including the SCHIP (child healthcare) package that was passed under President Clinton and then failed under Bush this year.

Before politics she was also an active lawyer and involved in the business world as a legal advisor.

By contrast, Obama has been in the US Senate for three years, was a member of the Illinois state legislature for a few years before that, but has mostly been involved in community activism while serving as President of the Harvard Law Review and a professor of law at the University of Chicago. So while he has been deeply engaged in civic issues, his experience at the national level is definitely not as deep as Hillary's, and his experience with foreign policy has been largely absorbed from people like Senator Biden while he has been a junior member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

So the argument comes down to what you think is more important - familiarity with the institutional responsibilities and challenges of the office of the President on Day 1, or a fresh take on the whole thing.
This kind of reminds me of my first month of being in University. Even things like finding your classes becomes time consuming. Silly little things like that could, as stupid as it sounds, [over dramatic] affect the out come of the world!!! [/over dramatic] Obama's time would be split between learning the ropes of the white house, like staff names, locations, and how he should organize his suits in the closet, and actually being president.

Does this matter? The voters will decide.

Right now the Dem ticket I like would be Hillary / Obama. Mainly because I don't see Hilary sticking around to help Obama, she's already been the white house in a supporting role.

In a humanitarian type of way I'd like to see McCain / Paul for the republicans because I think it would make for a good race where all kinds of issues are raised that should be raised.


TRIBE Member
Ya - but I think Hillary's experience is actually a liability to many people. As much as we look back to the Clinton years with nostalgia, how much of that is because things got so much worse after 2000?

Whats the worst thing about the Bush Presidency after all? In my books it isn't Bush himself so much as the team he assembled behind him. I think the most important asset of President is their ability to assemble the right kind of minds behind them. The next-most important thing is their ability to moderate this group and pull the best ideas and be able to say: THIS is what we're going to do.

So in this sense, direct experience is not as important as judgment and careful consideration. Obama harps on his Iraq position, and I think he's right to do so. Look at his Ohio speech before the war even started, and try and tell me everything he said didn't come true.

So what's he thinking? He stated he wouldn't even mind putting a Repugnant or two in his cabinet, such as Chuck Hagel. Not only do I think this is a smart idea politically, but someone like Hagel would be a good guy to have on foreign policy or military matters.

Click here for a list of his national security and foreign policy advisors (and Clinton's too):


  • Zbigniew Brzezinski - say what you will about his overall career, but what washington needs right now is a heavy dose of REALIST foreign policy.
  • Richard A. Clarke - if you haven't read his book do so immediately. This guy stands up for his beliefs and has talent up the wazoo.
  • Dennis B. Ross - look him up on wiki. Lot's to respect in this guy, great experience in the middle east specifically with Israel Palestine, wrote a good book on how to overcome the Bush Legacy as well.

I don't know all the names on both lists, but scanning through Clinton's I saw a few that worried me, but most do nothing for me, no enthusiasm:


  • Richard C. Holbrooke - nothing too objectionable about this guy, but he's straight down the middle. No excitment.
  • Michael O'Hanlon - washington think-tank superstar, "liberal hawk", a poster-boy for "Beltway Myopia".
  • Joseph Wilson - of Plamegate fame. I actually have tremendous respect for the man. So this guy's ok...;)
  • Samuel Berger - too much baggage.

I look at these lists, I look at people like Scowcroft endorsing Obama - and I think the whole "experience" line from the Clinton camp is just a tactic. An Obama administration would have what I think to be a better cabinet, overcoming any experience issues that Obama himself might have. As I said above, the ability to assemble a team is more important than how many years you've spent in the Senate.

I also think the experience line is a dangerous one long-term for Clinton - does she really want to remind people how much time she's spent in the Beltway Bubble? This election is framed as a "change election", and I'm not sure the experience line jives with that.
Last edited:


TRIBE Member
If Hilary ends up winning the Dem nod, I think McCain could give her a run for her money. I think Romney is way to right-wing to actually win the presidency and even though he maybe the Republican poster child, that fact will keep him from becoming the lead Rep candidate. I don't like a McCain/Romney ticket either, I think something like McCain/Guiliani has a better shot.

I'm hoping Obama wins, mostly for the symbolism, but ultimately because I really believe that Hillary is incompetent. She will NEVER be able to get out of her husbands shadow. Just picture her and Bill at all the diplomacy talks, who do you think gets the more sincere handshakes and smiles? I give her tons of credit for putting herself out there and running for President. She deserves a lot of admiration for that, but overall Obama has the entire package, eloquent speaker, warm personality and intelligent. If he can surround himself with the right people, he will be a good President. I think the Obama/Webb ticket wins here too. I'm not so sure where he stands on Iraq though and that may hurt him.


TRIBE Member
Genesius said:
If Hilary ends up winning the Dem nod, I think McCain could give her a run for her money.
it's an extremely winnable matchup for the Republicans, probably the only one for them, and hopefully the Dems will see that before its too late.
Having said that, McCain as Rep. nominee - much as i'd like to see it happen i just won't believe it until I see it. There's always that nagging sense that the conservative element of the party just won't let it happen and will throw all their might behind one of his foes.

Ditto Much

TRIBE Member
Only an idiot would want to be the next president of the USA. They are inheriting a nasty conflict a massive deficit a faltering economy and high oil prices. Really who ever wins this is cursed. I think this is why Jeb Bush wasn't run this time around, George sr knows its best to wait 8 years before putting another of his kin in line.

I want Clinton to win, mainly because I don't much like her. I think she should get to face waht she has voted for and supported for the last 8 years.


TRIBE Member
The whole experience angle Hillary used to attack Barack is a bullshit argument anyways. He has a substantial amount of experience and has been a sitting senator for long enough to know how things work. If he became president he'd have the whole democratic party behind him, so if he has to ask someone with more weighted experience for help, well duh he has the resources to do so.

Hillary will have a hard time against McCain. She voted with him on the biggest war bills, and voted against him when he tried to pass anti-torture legislation. Add to the fact that the current state of the Republicans means that the mere mention of the word Clinton causes organized GOP voter groups to spontaneously climb out of sewers looking for the nearest polling station and you have a close race. I really, really hope she doesn't win.


TRIBE Member
i think if it comes down to her losing by a small margin she's going to try and pull some sneaky shit to seat the Florida and Michigan delegates. Maybe it's farfetched but who knows.


TRIBE Member
It's really some kind of magic phenomenon. He came into this race as what was basically a no-name senator (well known in illinois and had a bit of a cult following but still small potatoes.) Hillary had massive double digit spreads over him and then this year hits and it seems like every time he holds a rally in a state he gains something like 10 points. It's unprecedented. And it speaks volumes as to his electability and where Clinton's base really lies. When Clinton doesn't have the advantage of name recognition voters are overwhelmingly turning to Barry.
Is it because people just want to vote for anyone but Hillary? I doubt it.

Apparently he raised $35 million in funds for January alone, from somewhere on the order of 230,000 seperate donors, which is climbing so fast right now that his website is bouncing people. That's pretty much unprecedented, and shows his support is still for the large part, grassroots, highly motivated, and ...growing. Hillary did not release her fundraising results.
This video is being emailed around right now, i think it's from a donation page or something, it's pretty awesome, not from a policy perspective, but from the tone it sets his campaign.



TRIBE Member
Political media maven Mark McKinnon, a Bush campaign veteran now advising GOP Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign, says he would quit the McCain campaign if the Arizona senator winds up in a general election race against Democratic Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois.

In a question-and-answer exchange with Cox Newspapers Washington Bureau, McKinnon said he’d vote for McCain over Obama, but “I just don’t want to work against an Obama candidacy” and that a President Obama “would send a great message to the country and the world.”

McKinnon, who worked only for Democratic candidates before signing on with Bush in 1997, confirmed a Newsweek report that he notified the McCain campaign around January about his decision not to work against Obama.


TRIBE Member
Ditto Much said:
Only an idiot would want to be the next president of the USA. They are inheriting a nasty conflict a massive deficit a faltering economy and high oil prices. Really who ever wins this is cursed.
well yeah there has to be something pathological to feeling like you're a very important part of solving these massive problems and that you can establish a legacy for yourself.

But as far as the grim times inheriting the presidency now is certainly not a worse lot than doing so in 1968 and possibly, knowing what we know now, in 1960 (i.e. with the CIA already having Cuba plans in motion).


TRIBE Member
I think both Obamah & Billary are both beatable by the Repubbies - if the Repubbies choose McCain that is. For those who think the 'conservative' element of the Republican party won't support McCain, well, you're dead wrong. As much as Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter bleat on about McCain's suggested lack of proper rubber hose conservatism, he's much more popular than either would care to imagine with social conservatives. If Huckabee takes his support and gifts them to McCain, then the 'social conservative' question is settled.

I think Obama would be a poor choice. I understand that his popularity, especially with the media, is currently unrivalled, but I am unconvinced that such a political novice could hold on to this momentum in a bitterly contested presidential campaign.


TRIBE Member
The republicans are brick shit afraid of Obama because they know how difficult he will be to defeat. The republicans have left the country in a tattered state and most people are sick of it. Obama doesn't have the political baggage that the other candidates have and is able to make people believe that the reason for that is because he knows what he is doing. His angle as a 'uniter' and his oratory skills and unique background will make it much easier for him to convince the public at large that only he can mend the tears in America's foreign relations. Add to that that his stimulus plan got the highest rating out of all the other candidates and you have someone who can completely outflank the republicans from every angle.
McCain is going to have his work cut out for him, especially being the guy who sings songs about bombing Iran at a time when American war weariness is at an all time high. Add to that fact that McCain supported Iraq, is like 200 years old, and is a completely cut and dry orator and he will get bodyslammed come the generals unless Hillary is the Democratic nominee.
Last edited:


TRIBE Member

Susan Eisenhower is more than just another disappointed Republican. She is also Ike's granddaughter and a dedicated member of the party who has urged her fellow Republicans in the past to stick with the GOP. But now Eisenhower, who runs an international consulting firm, is endorsing Barack Obama. She has no plans to officially leave the Republican Party. But in Eisenhower's view, Obama is the only candidate who can build a national consensus on the issues most important to her—energy, global warming, an aging population and America's standing in the world.

"Barack Obama will really be in a singular position to attract moderate Republicans," she told NEWSWEEK. "I wanted to do what many people did for my grandfather in 1952. He was hugely aided in his quest for the presidency by Democrats for Eisenhower. There's a long and fine tradition of crossover voters."
oh and he also turns republicans. that's like a level 18 democrat skill.


TRIBE Member

Grateful Dead to reunite for Obama concert
Sat Feb 2, 2008 1:26am EST

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters Life!) - The Grateful Dead, the San Francisco cult rock band that has played at political events since the 1960s, will reunite on Monday for the first time in four years to rally support for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, a spokesman said on Friday.

Band leader Jerry Garcia died in 1995. Surviving members have played together occasionally since then, most recently in 2004. On Monday, original members Mickey Hart, Phil Lesh and Bob Weir will play at a San Francisco theater a day before California's primary.

"They have agreed to reunite for this one-time-only event in order to lend support to Senator Obama leading into the crucial 'Super-Tuesday' series of primaries held on Tuesday, February 5th," the band said in a statement.

The band gained fame with its free-form psychedelic music when the counterculture movement flourished in San Francisco in the 1960s, and they attracted many loyal fans who came to be known as "Deadheads."

(Reporting by Adam Tanner)


TRIBE Member

Looks like a dead heat according to reuters, with Obama eking out an edge in California.

Obama has gained 16 points since Jan 20th, Clinton has lost two.

More good news for Obama from Zogby.


TRIBE Member
Obama has the rhetorical backing, but I'm not sure that's what will sell the public anymore ... while I respect Obama's political campaign, I feel like what America wants is someone who can offer sound solutions for stabilizing the economy and its internal affairs/organizations. I feel like Obama's position is weakened by this need and is what might give Clinton (that bitch) the edge. :)


TRIBE Member
Obama's economy package received the highest rating out of all the candidates. he's pretty strong on the economy. Clinton's edge lies in a huge part due to name recognition. Polls have consistently shown that as Obama gets more exposure, and more people become familiar with his policy positions and history that they flock to him in huge numbers.


Well-Known TRIBEr
Bass-Invader said:
Obama's economy package received the highest rating out of all the candidates. he's pretty strong on the economy. Clinton's edge lies in a huge part due to name recognition. Polls have consistently shown that as Obama gets more exposure, and more people become familiar with his policy positions and history that they flock to him in huge numbers.
I feel like this is due, at least in part, to the fact that people really want to like him but his name is never mentioned in the media and elsewhere without bringing up the racial issue. His policies just don't get the coverage!