The Next President?
- Thread starter Guest_
- Start date
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-fg-fornpol6-2008nov06,0,3642690.story
As above andrew
We shall see... I would suspect that domestic US opposition to the freeing of suspects in Guantanamo is a lot less pronounced than in europe and elsewhere
But it would be the most significant gesture that the Bush era is over. Very symbolic and regardless of the rights or wrongs of the camp, it has certainly been far too much of stick to beat the US with
Having said that, anyone expecting that Obama will be taking his lead from british Guardian readers and the cheeseeatingsurrendermonkeys will be in for a bit of a shock
There is an great piece by the excellent Bronwen maddox in the Times which i will link
As above andrew
We shall see... I would suspect that domestic US opposition to the freeing of suspects in Guantanamo is a lot less pronounced than in europe and elsewhere
But it would be the most significant gesture that the Bush era is over. Very symbolic and regardless of the rights or wrongs of the camp, it has certainly been far too much of stick to beat the US with
Having said that, anyone expecting that Obama will be taking his lead from british Guardian readers and the cheeseeatingsurrendermonkeys will be in for a bit of a shock
There is an great piece by the excellent Bronwen maddox in the Times which i will link
I just wish you felt the same about the next prime minister Davy Cameron.
Jaysus, I hadn't realised that 'call me Dave' had reinvented himself yet again as 'Davy Cameron king of the wild idea'. If he starts taking questions wearing a raccoon hat I'll have to revise that, but right now the self-styled "man with a plan" looks more like Davy Jones.
Clearly Cameron is no Obama despite his shameless (though perfectly understandable) attempts to latch on to the 'time for a change' agenda. So committed to this agenda of change, I note with a degree of wry amusement that only two years ago the inept Tories invited none other than John McCain to be their overseas guest speaker at their conference. Unfortunately, they still haven't mastered the out of box thinking. With New Labour so closely wedded to the Clinton machine and secretly backing her, why didn't the Tories think? It wouldn't have required a genius to work out that the Republicans were damaged currency and that any symbol of Bushism (whatever that ism is? - most definitions regard it as an incomprehensible statement of mangled words rather than a philosophy) would play out badly to a British electorate. So all they had to do was take a bit of a gamble and extend an invite to Obama and ask him to speak about change? How would that look now?
The 'man with a plan' might be a little bit more convincing if he actually shared it with us. Right now he looks more like Vic Reeves 'man with a stick'. Broadly speaking, Cameron has nothing like the appeal, nothing like the ability to reach out and plug into a broad base of disaffected and disenfranchised cohorts, and nothing like the oratory skills or what I might call the wow factor (no British politician has). Attempts to compare Obama and Cameron are fanciful in this regard.
I'm half wondering if another window around late March or early April isn't emerging as a potential general election date to be honest. I doubt Labour could win it outright, but it might offer them their best chance to do a damage limitation exercise or form a coalition etc In truth they might need to bring it forward to late January early February to avoid the unemployment hike that Feb will usher in, and which will stay with us incrementally through out 2009.
I'm not sure that any of us are under any illusions as to what an Obama administration will look like Clive. I wasn't taken in by Blair either, and know enough of Labour party histroy to know they shaft their natural support once they get the chance. I do believe however, there's actually a greater tradition in the Democrat party to defend the under dog? Roosevelts 'new deal', Kennedy never really had time but Johnson continued civil rights reform, Clinton was also a defender of the under dog hence his popularity with sections of the population of America remains strong today. Even Carter has dedicated much of his post Presidential activity to inequality etc
Last edited:
I think some are...... but anyway
He will defend americas interests first...second ..and third. Thats his job.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article5093849.ece
Me: << A clever move from Obama would be to offer Hillary the Health job>>
But the whole point is, she would turn it downShe would have to....
And how would that make Obama look clever?. All he'd look like to me was an idiot who'd been rebuffed and didn't know the state of mind of one of his senior Senators. She could easily turn it down by saying that she was committed to New York and assisting the Democrat programme through the Senate and lose no face or distance her self. It would do nothing to add to the aura of Obama American saviour has being rejected isn't normally seen as an endorsement. Obama's priority now is to form an administration and unite the country. He no longer needs to fight for the ehart of the Democrat party and should leave that battle behind. Hillary might well emerge as a malcontent thorn in his side, but she's only going to be able to prick the consciousness of her own powerbase rather than establish an alternative court. Even if she were able to set up de facto Democrat alternative, it's going to be largely dependent on Obama failing first and foremost, and as such she isn't in a position set an agenda but will have to wait and see if the wheels come off first.
The other thing to consider of course is just how stupid, confused and hypocritical he would look if he's built a campaign around 'time for change' and the first thing he does is call in (and get rebuffed) Hillary 'old stager' Clinton. I wish you could get a job as a Tory party strategist Headstrong
I don't think I do.
The point I was making is that Cameron was trying something akin to a 'change agenda' and thus invited a deeply conservative thinker of the old school who was closely associated with a damaged administration. In truth, with the exception of Rudy, few Republicans would play out well in the UK and if their strategists were seeking to establish some reflected association then there weren't many candidates. Inviting a military figure would have been equally suicidal 2 years ago. Obama had a lower profile, but had been touted as a possible and his candidancy didn't emerge as a shock. What you were doing in effect is trying to invite someone likely to embarrass New Labour. Or to use that wise old sage Richie Benaud's philosophy "always do what the opposition would like you to do least".
I always felt for instance that IDS made a mistake in not opposing the war in the Iraq. He would have suffered initially and brought down the ire of his party, but the conservatives would have been able to claim the high moral ground for a prolonged period now and would have sustained that momentum. Instead he meekly went along with it, and it prety well rendered him impotent (as it did the party) when they tried to expose the lies and falsehoods. It always pays to consider out of the box strategy.
Perhaps opposing the war in Iraq was not what they belived to be right at the time? All very well the hindsight now, but there were plenty that thought that a swift toppling of Saddam was entirely desirable. To me and I suspect many others, it was a a suprise he didnt have those weapons (how the inspectors could be sure was beyond me)
Anyway, thats old news now
Obama wont appoint Hilary to any role at all. Simply because... they cant stand each other
Anyway, thats old news now
Obama wont appoint Hilary to any role at all. Simply because... they cant stand each other
Sheikh
At the Start
Your a propagandists dream.
I dont wish to visit old ground here, but given that he had used weapons previously (in a vile manner) and that such weapons could be stored in a building the size of a bungalow...in a country the size of France.... i would like to know how anyone could be absolutely certain he had nothing at all
it was pure luck for the appeasers of Saddam that this happened to be the case
it was pure luck for the appeasers of Saddam that this happened to be the case
So the Mesiah is closing Guantanamo,
lets hope he does not give all the saints there the US citezenship.
And what would you suggest should happen to those 'suspects'?
Those already released without charge should be heavily compensated, and certain people in the US put to trial. If Europe had a backbone, it wouldn't have ever allowed this to happen.
What is Europe?????
What europeans should be focus is the scandal of what is happening in Congo, We should be ashamed of it.
Euronymous
Senior Jockey
Obama was considered a rising star after his speech at the `04 Democratic convention.
Sheikh
At the Start
That's about the first thing you ever got right or are at least on the right track, yes the ex European colonial powers should be ashamed.
Agree. Feckin Belgians.Quote:
Originally Posted by sunybay
What is Europe?????
What europeans should be focus is the scandal of what is happening in Congo, We should be ashamed of it.
That's about the first thing you ever got right or are at least on the right track, yes the ex European colonial powers should be ashamed.
betsmate
At the Start
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2004
- Messages
- 5,752
I heard on interesting quote in relation to the American election on the Slate Gabfest:
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." - Winston Churchill
I found it interesting that they were not considering that Obama was simply one of the other possibilities.
"Americans can always be counted on to do the right thing...after they have exhausted all other possibilities." - Winston Churchill
I found it interesting that they were not considering that Obama was simply one of the other possibilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sunybay
What is Europe?????
What europeans should be focus is the scandal of what is happening in Congo, We should be ashamed of it.
That's about the first thing you ever got right or are at least on the right track, yes the ex European colonial powers should be ashamed.
Complete garbage. How long has this country had independence?
Tom Baldwin, Washington div#related-article-links p a, div#related-article-links p a:visited {color:#06c;}
Hillary Clinton has emerged as a leading candidate to be the next Secretary of State after it was confirmed today she had held a secret meeting with Barack Obama in Chicago this week.
Two officials in the president-elect's transition team, apparently operating in concert, have disclosed that Mr Obama's opponent in this year's fiercely-contested Democratic primary is under serious consideration for America's top diplomatic post.
A close confidant of Mrs Clinton told The Times: "This was a very deliberate leak, perhaps to test the waters and see what the reaction is. But if they don't give it to her now they will have humiliated her again – and that would be a gigantic political mistake."
Speculation about her role increased after she was seen boarding a flight on Thursday to Chicago, Mr Obama's home city. Although Mrs Clinton's spokesman would only say she was travelling on "personal business", sources today acknowledged they had held behind-closed-doors talks.
Mr Obama has spoken about his desire to reach out to political opponents, including Republicans, as he forms his administration. He has cited Doris Kearns Goodwin's book "Team of Rivals” as a key text for him. He says the biography of Abraham Lincoln showed how he brought in former enemies and "was confident enough to be willing to have these dissenting voices".
Today, the President-elect announced he would hold talks on Monday in Chicago with John McCain, the Republican nominee in last week's election who has promised to help Mr Obama find bi-partisan solutions to the challenges facing America.
Previously John Kerry had been strongly linked to the post of Secretary of State, having been among those who gave early backing to Mr Obama in the primary campaign. But well-placed sources have indicated that the Democratic nominee in 2004 is no longer favourite for the job.
There are also suggestions that Joe Biden, the vice president-elect, is playing a key role in the choice not least because he knows both candidates well from their time together in the Senate.
He has often expressed his admiration for Mrs Clinton's depth of knowledge and experience on foreign policy. Mr Kerry, though regarded by some as a difficult colleague, would be in line to inherit Mr Biden's chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Michelle Obama, who was reported to be strongly opposed to Mrs Clinton being her husband's vice-presidential running-mate, this week had a half hour conversation with the former First Lady about bringing up children in the White House. By all accounts this was a warm and friendly exchange which did much to remove any remaining taint of bitterness between the two women.
In their contest for the Democratic nomination Mrs Clinton repeatedly questioned Mr Obama's credentials and experience to be commander-in-chief. But since conceding defeat in June, she campaigned effectively for him even after calls for her to be chosen as his running mate on a so-called "dream ticket" were not heeded.
Her confidant today suggested that the role of Secretary of State, with its clearly defined parameters, might be a "better job" than that of vice-president. Bringing Mrs Clinton inside the tent would have the added advantage of removing her from the battlefield should Mr Obama's administration, constrained by economic crisis, begin to go back on campaign promises such as introducing universal health care coverage.
There are, however, outstanding issues that would have to be resolved. Some of Mrs Clinton's supporters are known to be unhappy that Mr Obama has not done more to help her pay off a multi-million dollar campaign debt. And his team would also be worried that Bill Clinton, who has had many tangled foreign business dealings, could yet embarrass an administration that is promising transparency.
Earlier this week, Mrs Clinton was asked if she would consider taking a post in the Obama administration. "But I want to be a good partner and I want to do everything I can to make sure his agenda is going to be successful."
A number of former staff members from Mr Clinton's administration have already been appointed to key roles in Mr Obama's transition team. They include Rahm Emanuel, who will become chief of staff in the White House, whose Israeli heritage has already delighted a Jewish lobby that had previously harboured suspicions towards the president-elect.
His father, Benjamin Emanuel, has attracted controversy for saying: "Obviously he’ll influence the President to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to be mopping floors at the White House." He later apologised to the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee on behalf of his family.
Hillary Clinton has emerged as a leading candidate to be the next Secretary of State after it was confirmed today she had held a secret meeting with Barack Obama in Chicago this week.
Two officials in the president-elect's transition team, apparently operating in concert, have disclosed that Mr Obama's opponent in this year's fiercely-contested Democratic primary is under serious consideration for America's top diplomatic post.
A close confidant of Mrs Clinton told The Times: "This was a very deliberate leak, perhaps to test the waters and see what the reaction is. But if they don't give it to her now they will have humiliated her again – and that would be a gigantic political mistake."
Speculation about her role increased after she was seen boarding a flight on Thursday to Chicago, Mr Obama's home city. Although Mrs Clinton's spokesman would only say she was travelling on "personal business", sources today acknowledged they had held behind-closed-doors talks.
Mr Obama has spoken about his desire to reach out to political opponents, including Republicans, as he forms his administration. He has cited Doris Kearns Goodwin's book "Team of Rivals” as a key text for him. He says the biography of Abraham Lincoln showed how he brought in former enemies and "was confident enough to be willing to have these dissenting voices".
Today, the President-elect announced he would hold talks on Monday in Chicago with John McCain, the Republican nominee in last week's election who has promised to help Mr Obama find bi-partisan solutions to the challenges facing America.
Previously John Kerry had been strongly linked to the post of Secretary of State, having been among those who gave early backing to Mr Obama in the primary campaign. But well-placed sources have indicated that the Democratic nominee in 2004 is no longer favourite for the job.
There are also suggestions that Joe Biden, the vice president-elect, is playing a key role in the choice not least because he knows both candidates well from their time together in the Senate.
He has often expressed his admiration for Mrs Clinton's depth of knowledge and experience on foreign policy. Mr Kerry, though regarded by some as a difficult colleague, would be in line to inherit Mr Biden's chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Michelle Obama, who was reported to be strongly opposed to Mrs Clinton being her husband's vice-presidential running-mate, this week had a half hour conversation with the former First Lady about bringing up children in the White House. By all accounts this was a warm and friendly exchange which did much to remove any remaining taint of bitterness between the two women.
In their contest for the Democratic nomination Mrs Clinton repeatedly questioned Mr Obama's credentials and experience to be commander-in-chief. But since conceding defeat in June, she campaigned effectively for him even after calls for her to be chosen as his running mate on a so-called "dream ticket" were not heeded.
Her confidant today suggested that the role of Secretary of State, with its clearly defined parameters, might be a "better job" than that of vice-president. Bringing Mrs Clinton inside the tent would have the added advantage of removing her from the battlefield should Mr Obama's administration, constrained by economic crisis, begin to go back on campaign promises such as introducing universal health care coverage.
There are, however, outstanding issues that would have to be resolved. Some of Mrs Clinton's supporters are known to be unhappy that Mr Obama has not done more to help her pay off a multi-million dollar campaign debt. And his team would also be worried that Bill Clinton, who has had many tangled foreign business dealings, could yet embarrass an administration that is promising transparency.
Earlier this week, Mrs Clinton was asked if she would consider taking a post in the Obama administration. "But I want to be a good partner and I want to do everything I can to make sure his agenda is going to be successful."
A number of former staff members from Mr Clinton's administration have already been appointed to key roles in Mr Obama's transition team. They include Rahm Emanuel, who will become chief of staff in the White House, whose Israeli heritage has already delighted a Jewish lobby that had previously harboured suspicions towards the president-elect.
His father, Benjamin Emanuel, has attracted controversy for saying: "Obviously he’ll influence the President to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to be mopping floors at the White House." He later apologised to the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee on behalf of his family.