I am not suggesting you are wrong, CG, but I am curious...just what are Obama's qualifications and how do you arrive at the conclusion they are remarkable?

He is a natural born citizen, and he is at least 35 years of age and has been a resident of the USA for at least 14 years. What other qualifications does he need?

In that case, Bush is remarkably qualified to be President then as well...yet, we do not hear you extolling his qualifications.

Lets be more pointed, CG...what senior executive or managerial experience does Obama have? What makes him "remarkably qualified" to run the various agencies of the Executive Branch of government? You are the one that said his qualifications are remarkable, CG...I simply asked why you believe that...or, did you mean to suggest that meeting the requirements for a position makes one "remarkably qualified" for that position? Have you been taking language lessons from Liz? Is this a new definition of remarkable with which the rest of us are not yet familiar?

LM, I think it's his incredible voice that does if for me... Why don't you just smile for a change?

Bush has an MBA from Harvard. Obviously that meant a lot to non-thinking voters.

Of the three 'front-runners,' the only one with any experience in world and/or domestic politics, through her husband, is Hillary Clinton. The other two--although McCain has many years in the Senate--have little or no experience in foreign policy.

I find CG's response very indicative of the way so many people vote. It makes no difference to the average voter what the candidate could possibly do (which, of course, isn't much)--it has to do with how they present themselves--an old man, a young man with a golden voice, or a middle-aged woman in pants suits. Faced with that, the bulk of the people will cast a partison vote. What else do they know to do?

As every younger generation since at least Plato's time has made this statement, I am offering my usual high stakes bet against.

"We are stardust, we are golden, and we're going to look really stupid to future generations." --David Letterman, commenting on hippies.

Liz, I'm beginning to think you are a "neo-con"...LOL! Here is a so you know I am joking. No, I haven't fallin heads over heels for that sexy incredible voice. Although I agree with Trutti he would be a fine model for Calvin Klein.


Americans that support Obama are looking for hope. Pelosi and Reid were a huge disappointment. Now they want their hope realized through Obama.

Obamamania tells me Americans are just plain fed up with this lying bunch in Washington...everyone from Gg.Bush to Harry Reid. Voters are not looking for experience, they are looking for change. They desire accountability. (investigations into this administrations wrong doings,). They want OUT of Iraq. They want the USA to be popular once again with the rest of the world... They want the dollar to be king again. They want JOBS back into the USA. The list goes on....

They have hope this will be delivered to them through Obama. Obama's speaking pattern, his way of instilling confidence when he speaks, all make people believe hope is on it's way...

Personally, at this time I support Hillary... PLEASE, DO NOT compare Hillary's experience to McCain's experience. McCain beats her hands down in that arena. There is NO comparison...

The reason I support Hillary, is she can sit down and layout a Presidential plan. for instance while speaking in foreclosure torn Ohio, she has a plan to put a 90 day moratorium on foreclosures. Her health plan is one of the best out there. Sure it needs tweaking. To date it is the most thought out plan of the top three candidates running. She has put thought into what her work will entail.

McCain, lost me when at the debate at the Reagan library, he admitted he hadn't given the issue of the economy much thought. What is he smoking?????? Then there was the real doozy, turning Iraq into McCainistan by staying there for 100 years!!!

Hillary's worst mistake will cost her the White House, she underestimated Obama. Over confidence will kill anyone...

This Tues., I hope she will succeed. If not, I will put my support behind Obama, at least he understands the economy is in dire need of repair.

Personally, I think 1600 PA. St. will make the man dizzy..but I could be wrong.

Hope in a bottle? This may be what voters are left with in 2012.

Hello Cy, good to hear from you.

Anyway I agree with you that any color would do, but it' seems we don't have any purple or green this time, but color does'nt matter to me either, but I'll vote for the one who I think is best.

Like I said earlier, It's time for america to stop thinking in terms of black and white because we're not the only game in town any more, we have to also consider our brown (Hispanic) brothers and sisters into the equation, and that can also include the red people (Indians),because they were the first americans before any of us were, (But I won't get into that), but what I'm trying to say is that this Country is'nt just about white or black people, it's about all the people because all of us have a stake in this.

As far as my Rapper comment, it's the truth the youth will listen to a rapper (Right or Wrong) before they will listen to these old leaders who have'nt done anything for anybody except themselves, and these kids know this (Whether we do or not).

But I will say this, this next generation of kids will not have the hangups or baggage that the older generations carry arond with them, these dkids want [something else for their lives, not the same old tired people, and issues that have'nt got us anywhere.

Sleek PM wrote:

My hippie cousin Leigh, who is now 60, was one of those kids in 60's! Right out of San Fransisco, she joined a commune, grew her own organic everything... Wore her bell bottoms until they came back in style again. Today she has the same hang ups her American Colonel father had... I thought she was cool.. So much for misspent idealism!

Glad you added the smiley, CG--otherwise my feelings would have been very hurt.

But I was very serious about how I think most people vote. I don't believe most people go much farther than the projected image of a candidate.

That's a shame, because I agree that Hillary Clinton has the best presidential plan--which includes her medical plan. But I would bet (if I were a betting woman) that the majority of people, whether democrat or republican, haven't any idea of what we're talking about! I'm not talking about the people who go to their caucuses or vote in their primaries. I'm talking about the small percentage of the people who actually get out and vote!

The media doesn't help. As soon as it senses a change, it pounces and plays on that change.

The media created Obamamania, in my opinion, and it's also contributed to Hillary's possible demise.

As for McCain, yes, he has more Senate experience than Clinton. He also caves to lobbyists, as you said earlier, and (to me) would mean more of the same-old same-old--without Dick Cheney. (But what do we know about his behind-the-scenes people?) He knows the insides and outsides of Washington politics--but is this a good thing? But the media doesn't concentrate on McCain any more.

Will we be faced with McCain vs Obama at the polls--or McCain vs Clinton?

Only the media knows.