PDA

View Full Version : Elections Interesting question posed by Bill Clinton.


Direckshun
08-26-2008, 02:13 PM
"Suppose you're a voter, and you've got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don't think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?"

He quickly backpedaled to argue that he's not talking about the current election, but it's hard not to see it.

Anyway, which would you choose?

Poll to come.

Taco John
08-26-2008, 02:16 PM
So he's saying that McCain can accomplish more for the Democrats than Obama can?

Chiefnj2
08-26-2008, 02:17 PM
It would probably depend on whether he can deliver z - the half of issues I disagree with.

dirk digler
08-26-2008, 02:18 PM
With friends like this Obama doesn't need any enemies

Direckshun
08-26-2008, 02:19 PM
So he's saying that McCain can accomplish more for the Democrats than Obama can?
He's said that's not what he's saying.

But I think we can all draw our own conclusions there...

BigCatDaddy
08-26-2008, 02:23 PM
How many days until Jake post the McCain add with Bill on there saying this? :)

jettio
08-26-2008, 02:28 PM
In this hypothetical, did candidate Z have a mismanaged campaign and a philandering husband with a big mouth?

jAZ
08-26-2008, 02:39 PM
So he's saying that McCain can accomplish more for the Democrats than Obama can?
He's talking about Hillary and Obama.

Obama = Candidate X (Dems agree entirely, but won't win)
Hillary = Candidate Y (Dems agree 50%, but will win)

jAZ
08-26-2008, 02:46 PM
I thought Obama and Hillary basically had the same platform?

She voted for the war, and is clearly more hawkish/DLC. From a Dem party perspective those differences are large. From a general election perspective they are far smaller.

He's just pouting.

Taco John
08-26-2008, 02:46 PM
I think Bill has alzhiemers or something. The guy seems stupid these days.

mlyonsd
08-26-2008, 02:48 PM
There's no doubt in my mind Bill and Hill are looking ahead to 2012.

dirk digler
08-26-2008, 02:50 PM
He's talking about Hillary and Obama.

Obama = Candidate X (Dems agree entirely, but won't win)
Hillary = Candidate Y (Dems agree 50%, but will win)

I disagree I think he is talking about Obama vs McCain

morphius
08-26-2008, 02:51 PM
What I find entertaining is that the Congress is at a 9% approval rating, and both of our candidates come from that pathetic group of people.

StcChief
08-26-2008, 02:51 PM
There's no doubt in my mind Bill and Hill are looking ahead to 2012.so Bill doesn't want NoBama to win, so sHillary can challenge in 2012.....

HC_Chief
08-26-2008, 02:59 PM
I had to take the third option due to its hilarity.

beer bacon
08-26-2008, 03:02 PM
"Suppose you're a voter, and you've got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don't think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?"

He quickly backpedaled to argue that he's not talking about the current election, but it's hard not to see it.

Anyway, which would you choose?

Poll to come.

Candidate X is McCain: Many moderately conservative folk may agree with him on the issues, but he won't be able to get anything done since the Democrats will have heavy majorities in both houses

Candidate Y is Obama: You may not agree with him on everything, but he is much likely to get some of the things you want done. He works in a bipartisan fashion and will have lots of support in both houses.

This is fun.

Ultra Peanut
08-26-2008, 03:03 PM
Where is the "Bill Clinton is retarded" option?

Calcountry
08-26-2008, 03:04 PM
So he's saying that McCain can accomplish more for the Democrats than Obama can?No, it depends on what the definition of Y is.

HC_Chief
08-26-2008, 03:04 PM
Where is the "Bill Clinton is retarded" option?

You guys are finally starting to catch on?

Calcountry
08-26-2008, 03:04 PM
I only vote in SECRET ballots, like the one this November.

BigCatDaddy
08-26-2008, 03:08 PM
They just don't want to have to wait 8 year to run again if O wins. They will sabotage him one way or another.

orange
08-26-2008, 03:56 PM
Bill Clinton was speaking hypothetically, about two non-real candidates.

"Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don't think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. "

The fact that EVERYONE equates that immediately to Obama tells alot, doesn't it?!

orange
08-26-2008, 03:58 PM
Candidate X is McCain: Many moderately conservative folk may agree with him on the issues, but he won't be able to get anything done since the Democrats will have heavy majorities in both houses

If people truly believed that, WHY the outrage in the Obama camp?

J Diddy
08-26-2008, 03:58 PM
Where is the "Bill Clinton is retarded" option?

hillary made him do it

orange
08-26-2008, 04:01 PM
If people truly believed that, WHY the outrage in the Obama camp?

What was I thinking? The Obama camp NEVER needs a reason to be outraged!

banyon
08-26-2008, 05:35 PM
He's talking about Hillary and Obama.

Obama = Candidate X (Dems agree entirely, but won't win)
Hillary = Candidate Y (Dems agree 50%, but will win)

I don't think this is likely. He's saying both candidates can get elected, but only one will be savvy enough to actually get things done in Washington. He could be talking about Hillary, but the timing makes it totally irrelevant, so it makes more sense to be about McCain/Obama.

irishjayhawk
08-26-2008, 05:39 PM
Candidate X is McCain: Many moderately conservative folk may agree with him on the issues, but he won't be able to get anything done since the Democrats will have heavy majorities in both houses

Candidate Y is Obama: You may not agree with him on everything, but he is much likely to get some of the things you want done. He works in a bipartisan fashion and will have lots of support in both houses.

This is fun.

That was my gut instinct too.