Just wondering. I made some remark about this on a political thread the other day, that I didn't really know if there is any difference between them on issues, I just find them to be at opposite ends of the personableness spectrum.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
>_< Are we still doing the So* thing? Must we?
Posted by Enigmatic (Member # 7785) on :
Clinton is in favor of the using So*, Obama opposes it.
--Enigmatic
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
I think "So" in this case serves a purpose, in that this question isn't overly important to me, but I am curious. Without the "So," it might seem snarkier.
The asterisk is for tradition.
Posted by kmbboots (Member # 8576) on :
I think that the real difference - other than personality and possible integrity/experience issues - is one of how we elect people.
For me Obama represents more of a grassroots, lots of small donors, kind of campaign. Clinton represents a well-oiled political machine with bigger donors who owe her (or her husband) favours.
Obama - or Edwards - seem to be to be about changing the political system. Clinton seems to be about playing the game very well.
Posted by Qaz (Member # 10298) on :
Various political groups rank representatives on their voting records -- how much they like the rep's positions, basically. Many of them are clearly identifiable as left or right (NRA, NOW, ACLU, etc.).
H Clinton, Obama, and Edwards tend to rate around 0-5% pleasing to conservative orgnizations and 95-100% pleasing to liberal organizations. So although they may have specific issue differences, they're broadly similar. (By comparison, McCain, the most conservative of the early-2007 big 3 GOP, was I think something like 20-25% pleasing to liberals and 80% or so pleasing to conservatives.)
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
Well, the main difference between Hillary and Obama is that Hillary is white and Obama is black.
Just joking.
The main difference is that she's a woman.
Posted by Lisa (Member # 8384) on :
I'm more interested in the difference between "*So" and "So*". We need a Hatrack glossary.
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
A few years ago there was about a dozen threads on the front page that started with "So" or "Well". Then we had a thread asking whether all those so's and wells were necessary, and that's where the asterisk was born.
I wouldn't say my "So" is necessary, but I was hoping it would convey a tone of casual interest.
But I guess it is a bit slangy, to the degree that slang passes here.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I could not care less if the word "So" appears in a thread title. The asterisk was cute initially, but now it's just freaking annoying.
(And if you MUST do it, it was originally "So*" not "*So". )
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
How do I feel about the choice between Clinton and Obama?
**So-so**
Posted by Primal Curve (Member # 3587) on :
There asterix was usually there because the poster had some sort of postscript or footnote at the bottom of the OP to explain why they put the So* (Hopefully humorously) or to crack a joke at someon
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
I believe pooka was the first to put an asterisk after "So," and it led to a note commenting on the fact that a lot of threads start with "So." Then people thought it was cute, and now it's some sort of zombie meme that won't die, now matter how many times you blast it with a shotgun.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
I'd rather see the forum peppered with "So*"s than with Dobies.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
What I don't understand is the opposition to Hatrack having it's own memes and traditions. I like it when I use a meme from another forum and someone recognizes it. Someone once pegged me as an old timey usenetter because I used the term "Cow-orker." I thought that was cool.
Back to the original question, I'm curious for some policy answers. How ARE Obama and Hillary different? What policies would they impliment differently?
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
When I see/hear cow-orker, I think of Scott Adams and the Dilbert Newsletter. I thought he coined that and would have assumed you got it from him.
Posted by The Pixiest (Member # 1863) on :
I dunno. did he use it prior to 1990? That's when I first saw it on Usenet.
Posted by Jon Boy (Member # 4284) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: What I don't understand is the opposition to Hatrack having it's own memes and traditions.
I've never seen someone oppose memes and traditions in general.
Posted by maui babe (Member # 1894) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: I dunno. did he use it prior to 1990? That's when I first saw it on Usenet.
Probably not. I think I first saw/heard it in the late '90's.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Jon Boy: I believe pooka was the first to put an asterisk after "So," and it led to a note commenting on the fact that a lot of threads start with "So." Then people thought it was cute, and now it's some sort of zombie meme that won't die, now matter how many times you blast it with a shotgun.
Exactly.
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: I'd rather see the forum peppered with "So*"s than with Dobies.
Not me. The occasional Dobie is funny.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
One of the big ones, to my mind, is that Obama has been consistent on his feelings regarding Iraq, whereas Clinton seems to be hedging her bets in the hope of not alienating a few swing voters.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
)