Obama is taking on a radical tone in his campaign. He got caught in a silly statement during the recent debate, saying he would promise to sit down and talk with dictators during his first year as president. Instead of backing away from the statement, like a willful child he has been saying the "naughty" word repeatedly ever since.
Should Obama continue to radicalize his campaign? It may be his only chance to get the nomination (though it would destroy his chances for VP or re-election to the senate). Maybe he should come out for legalization of drugs, supporting gay marriage, slavery repairations, ebonics, open borders. It would be a way to mobilize the internet left. If he really caught a spark, he might even win.
2007-07-29 09:10:11 · 5 answers · asked by A Plague on your houses 5 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
he will be, once he is in office.
2007-07-29 15:10:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Being too radical is risky. too much in one direction and they could lose alot of support.
Politicians have to walk a tight rope to gain popularity. Supporting gay marrige ebonics and open borders is not favorable to many people. So its best for a politician to stay away from those issues.
To win they have to stick with the main issues like getting the troops home and closing out the Iraq war.
2007-07-29 16:17:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
What is radical about heads of state meeting and talking, regardless of their politics?
Isn't it better than US presidents providing financial support and arms to dictators, as was done with Noriega, Idi Amin, and even Saddam Hussein?
Where do you get your definition of radical? From a cereal box?
2007-07-29 16:29:53 · answer #3 · answered by nora22000 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yeh i think so
2007-07-29 17:48:29 · answer #4 · answered by sean 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
osama bin laden?
2007-07-29 16:17:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋