[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:
I’ve always wondered about what Ghandi the person was like as opposed to Ghandi the legend.[/quote]
A great man, like MLK.
But, being great in one aspect of your life does not necessarily mean that you are in all others.
Especially not if all the nitwits pointing their fingers have not achieved even above mediocre status once in their lives.
Usually it is not that tragic, to change whole societies you need to be kind of a go getter and they usually do not lose that aspect when it comes to pussy.
[/quote]
So true. So many great American politicians in our history have been like that. I think the 24 hour media cycle has been far more of a curse on politics rather than a blessing.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
You really need to get your quotes straight man. LBJ said 200 years. Don’t take the man’s vision away from him. Also, if by “worked” you are referring to black people (as there’s no such thing as a “nigger”), I am happy to report that I personally know many such people for whom it has NOT “worked”. It has NOT worked because they understand that the principles that made this once great nation great know no skin color. Their self identity is eternally higher than the quantity of melanin in their skin. [/quote]
The black vote is like 90% Democrat.[/quote]
Numbers are skewed a bit because Obama is black, 90% is too high. I’m guessing 2004 was much much lower, like 88% or somewhere in that area.[/quote]
[quote]orion wrote:[quote]Tiribulus wrote:You really need to get your quotes straight man. LBJ said 200 years. Don’t take the man’s vision away from him. Also, if by “worked” you are referring to black people (as there’s no such thing as a “nigger”), I am happy to report that I personally know many such people for whom it has NOT “worked”. It has NOT worked because they understand that the principles that made this once great nation great know no skin color. Their self identity is eternally higher than the quantity of melanin in their skin. [/quote]The black vote is like 90% Democrat.[/quote]Not the ones I know.
If John Kennedy were alive today he would not be a democrat.
[/quote]
I’m really curious how people in the late 50’s and 60’s would have reacted to the “spread the wealth around” and “you didn’t build that” stuff.
I imagine the folks at woodstock would have had “we need socialism” signs like some of the people at occupy, but on a general level, I wonder what the reaction would have been.[/quote]
On a related note, I wonder if the “youth vote” was significantly higher during the same period given all the political turmoil and the Vietnam division (not to mention protest)
If John Kennedy were alive today he would not be a democrat.
[/quote]
I’m really curious how people in the late 50’s and 60’s would have reacted to the “spread the wealth around” and “you didn’t build that” stuff.
I imagine the folks at woodstock would have had “we need socialism” signs like some of the people at occupy, but on a general level, I wonder what the reaction would have been.[/quote]
On a related note, I wonder if the “youth vote” was significantly higher during the same period given all the political turmoil and the Vietnam division (not to mention protest)[/quote]
The youth vote was never a serious factor at any point over the past 45 years. Obama brought as many of them out as anyone. That won’t happen again as many of them know at this point that he’s not only just another politician but a politician of the worst kind…Chicago style!
Romney wins this thing by, not winning, but cutting into the female vote. And of course carrying independents, where he is well ahead as of today. He also must win seniors by a small margin (it’s close now). And of course winning white adult males where is way, way ahead.
Obama can win everywhere else and it won’t matter.