OT: 2008 Elections/Politics thread, Part 2

[Slumberland]

I hate this election already.

Whoever can balance the budget, catch Bin Laden and put him on trial, put an end to torture (or "enhanced interrogation" if you like) and make it impossible to wiretap me without a warrant has got my vote. Four simple things. They can devote a year to each one.

[Brando70]

This election looks nothing like 2004. For one thing, Kerry got absolutely gobsmacked by the media with the Swift Boat and flip-flop issues...It said a lot about the weakness of the Bush presidency that a sitting president during a war could receive such a challenge from a candidate who was bashed so heavily.

I disagree, and more persuasively I hope, so do your friends at CMPA.

http://www.cmpa.com/files/media_monitor/04novdec.pdf

I stand corrected. Yes, you read the correctly.

Do you know if they did any studies of print coverage of 2004? I admittedly am not much of a news watcher, except for occasional dips into CNN if something is breaking. My memory of the 04 campaign was that print coverage was pretty negative of Kerry, but that could also be because I was an ardent Daily Howler reader back then.

[Teal]

I think it's hilarious that people are going after Palin on her qualifications (or lack thereof) when she isn't running for president. I prefer a governor over a senator any day. And when experience is weighed against experience, she still comes out on top for two reasons.

1) She has actual governing experience. (What's her foreign policy experience? Good question. What's Baracks?)

2)She's the VP nominee. Barack has to stand up to the same scrutiny, but he's attempting to be president, not VP. It's comparing apples and oranges.

"Oh, but she's only a heartbeat away from the presidency!"

Fine by me...it's better than trying to BE the president.

Tell you what...this 'lack of experience' thing? Obama's camp had better tread VERY lightly there. In fact, if they have any sense they'll drop it altogether-because it WILL backfire and bite them on the ass.

That particular emporer has no clothes on this issue.

The National Inquirer bullshit doesn't help much, either, but both sides are doing that.

Depends on the state right.

Seriously, what does it take to be gov of Alaska.

Go run for the office, do it a couple of years, and then you tell me. She's more qualified than a poster at a sports-gaming forum, I'll tell you that! (and yes, that was meant to be self-effacing, as well)

[XXXIV]

I hate this election already.

Whoever can balance the budget, catch Bin Laden and put him on trial, put an end to torture (or "enhanced interrogation" if you like) and make it impossible to wiretap me without a warrant has got my vote. Four simple things. They can devote a year to each one.

Whats wrong with torture?...you need to meet the right woman

[RobVarak]

I hate this election already.

Whoever can balance the budget, catch Bin Laden and put him on trial, put an end to torture (or "enhanced interrogation" if you like) and make it impossible to wiretap me without a warrant has got my vote. Four simple things. They can devote a year to each one.

Chuck Norris could do that. In between inaugural balls.

[Teal]

The book banning thing troubles me, but I'm going to withold judgment until we have something more reliable that Time magazine ("Yep, We're Still Around") printing a quote from a vanquished rival without any corroborating source. LOL

Says the man who cited a post on Little Green Fascists as a source

This election looks nothing like 2004. For one thing, Kerry got absolutely gobsmacked by the media with the Swift Boat and flip-flop issues. I knew Kerry had no chance of winning (I wasn't really keen on him myself) and was shocked it was so close. It said a lot about the weakness of the Bush presidency that a sitting president during a war could receive such a challenge from a candidate who was bashed so heavily. Obama's coverage was initially very positive, but since the Wright incident, it's been more critical. He's gotten more airtime but the Center for Media and Public Affairs, which studies positive/negative coverage of candidates, has found Obama received more negative coverage once the general election started.

The point of Palin's experience is that the GOP really can't criticize Obama's lack of experience. If they think Palin has enough experience to succeed McCain, they have to agree Obama has enough to be president. The amount of experience for both is pretty slight -- they are both talented AA pitchers who got called up early because their clubs are desperate.

Yes good point. The whole experience angle they can't use anymore due to their VP pick. Maybe that's why they changed and are running on the reformer platform now.

I think if McCain had picked LIberman, it would have been much better for him. It would have attracted a lot of democrats, especially Hillary democrats to his side. And a lot of independents would have seen it as a bipartisan campaign. Too bad the people controlling the GOP did not want that.

You sure are talking out of your ass alot these days, Siam-'too bad the people controlling the GOP did not want that'?! Are we talking about the same McCain? Hell, the people controlling the GOP (bet you believe in the Illuminati, too, don'tcha?) didn't want MCCAIN!

[Teal]

Incidentally, this pick is looking better to me (and I liked her from the get-go) after seeing the Obamite and media reaction. It's got the Obamanistas comparing their candidate to our VP and the media barring its teeth like they did in the run-up to the 2004 election. Nothing bodes better for the GOP than when the MSM starts to really go to work to help the Democrats. Dan Rather, your table is ready.

They polled Rep's yesterday at the convention and over 50% of them said they thought Palin was a poor pick. I really don't think the Dem's are too worried about her. I don't think McCain could have made a better pick to help out the Dem's side. Especially after they criticized Obama's lack of experience so strongly. I guess McCain doesn't think his VP needs the same experience? Everyone knows he picked her to grab the disenfranchised Hillary supporters.

WHO polled them, Jack? The answer to that question will be far more telling than the results of their poll.

[greggsand]

Has anyone seen that pic of her in a red & white & blue bikini & rifle? Pretty hot.

[RobVarak]

WHO polled them, Jack? The answer to that question will be far more telling than the results of their poll.

Like I said 10 minutes and 3 pages ago LOL

JackB1 wrote:

They polled Rep's yesterday at the convention and over 50% of them said they thought Palin was a poor pick.


Well this poll seems to disagree with the source that you cited

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/b ... dist=msr_1

Quote:
Among Republican voters, 69% believe the choice of Palin was a good one


Did someone pronounce today Just Post Crazy s*** To The Internet Day and not let me know?

[Jackdog]

No. But my opinion means nothing. I wasn't elected by my constitutes to check facts and make damn sure everything was in order before sending troops in to kill and be killed.

Fair enough and no matter how you slice and dice it it's still tragic what went down. You're living proof of the horrors of war and what it can do.

That's why I respect anyone friend or foe alike who has ever been in the battle zone.

What some Dems seem to forget is that in 06 when they won back the majority of the House and Senate they did it based on ending the war in Iraq. If they really wanted to leave Iraq all they had to do was cut the funding for it with a simple majority vote. That's who I would be pissed at if I was aginist the war in Iraq. Maybe that's why Congress has such a low approval rating.

[wco81]

If a member of Congress is running for president, he or she doesn't have executive branch experience.

If a governor is running, he or she doesn't have foreign policy experience.

If a candidate has legislative, foreign policy and executive branch experience, he or she is a career politician, who've done nothing else in their life except to prepare to be president, with some oversized sense of entitlement to power.

[RobVarak]

If a member of Congress is running for president, he or she doesn't have executive branch experience.

If a governor is running, he or she doesn't have foreign policy experience.

If a candidate has legislative, foreign policy and executive branch experience, he or she is a career politician, who've done nothing else in their life except to prepare to be president, with some oversized sense of entitlement to power.

Which is why WCO would like to announce that he's endorsing me, as I have none of the above

[Brando70]

Has anyone seen that pic of her in a red & white & blue bikini & rifle? Pretty hot.

Photoshopped. Although pretty good, I was fooled at first.

[Inuyasha]

Says the man who cited a post on Little Green Fascists as a source

This election looks nothing like 2004. For one thing, Kerry got absolutely gobsmacked by the media with the Swift Boat and flip-flop issues. I knew Kerry had no chance of winning (I wasn't really keen on him myself) and was shocked it was so close. It said a lot about the weakness of the Bush presidency that a sitting president during a war could receive such a challenge from a candidate who was bashed so heavily. Obama's coverage was initially very positive, but since the Wright incident, it's been more critical. He's gotten more airtime but the Center for Media and Public Affairs, which studies positive/negative coverage of candidates, has found Obama received more negative coverage once the general election started.

The point of Palin's experience is that the GOP really can't criticize Obama's lack of experience. If they think Palin has enough experience to succeed McCain, they have to agree Obama has enough to be president. The amount of experience for both is pretty slight -- they are both talented AA pitchers who got called up early because their clubs are desperate.

Yes good point. The whole experience angle they can't use anymore due to their VP pick. Maybe that's why they changed and are running on the reformer platform now.

I think if McCain had picked LIberman, it would have been much better for him. It would have attracted a lot of democrats, especially Hillary democrats to his side. And a lot of independents would have seen it as a bipartisan campaign. Too bad the people controlling the GOP did not want that.

You sure are talking out of your ass alot these days, Siam-'too bad the people controlling the GOP did not want that'?! Are we talking about the same McCain? Hell, the people controlling the GOP (bet you believe in the Illuminati, too, don'tcha?) didn't want MCCAIN!

I don't know, I'm going off the msnbc article. I'm not making this up, just going off the article.

Here's the article :

Up until midweek last week, some 48 to 72 hours before Mr. McCain introduced Ms. Palin at a Friday rally in Dayton, Ohio, Mr. McCain was still holding out the hope that he could name as his running mate a good friend, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, independent of Connecticut, a Republican close to the campaign said. Mr. McCain had also been interested in another favorite, former Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania.

But both men favor abortion rights, anathema to the Christian conservatives who make up a crucial base of the Republican Party. As word leaked out that Mr. McCain was seriously considering the men, the campaign was bombarded by outrage from influential conservatives who predicted an explosive floor fight at the convention and vowed rejection of Mr. Ridge or Mr. Lieberman by the delegates.

Also I don't believe in the Illuminati and I don't believe in some magical man in the sky controlling everything. No real difference between the two.

[JackB1]

Has anyone seen that pic of her in a red & white & blue bikini & rifle? Pretty hot.

Photoshopped. Although pretty good, I was fooled at first.

What about this one?

[JackB1]

WHO polled them, Jack? The answer to that question will be far more telling than the results of their poll.

It was in my Atlanta newspaper I just read at lunch. I will try and find the article.

Edit: found the article, but it's not on the ajc website. It says the source is cnn polls. To be more exact, it said that 46% said the pick was "fair or poor"
and 52% said it was "good or excellent" and 2% didn't have an opinion.

[JackB1]

Otherwise, it just shows that there are a lot of issues with the pick of Palin (and possibly w/McCain's judgment in choosing her as running mate).

Exactly. It is McCain's judgment that everyone should be questioning. What's going to happen if he get's in the White House and has to make Supreme Court appointments?

[matthewk]

And how come everyone is ignoring what Obama said that children should be off limits. Didn't hear any of the right wingers give Obama credit on that.

O'Reily mentioned it more than once on his show last night. He along with a few of the guests on his show gave Obama his props for making that statement.

Maybe if you listened to what the right wingers had to say once in a while you would know some of these things.

[webdanzer]

I like the BSG ticket:

[matthewk]

I really don't think the Dem's are too worried about her.

Then why is she getting 90% of the coverage the past week? Sems like the Dems are tripping over themselves to try and find any dirt they can to discredit her.

I find it funny that they dug up her hubby's DUI from when he was 22. Why is that an issue but Obama's own admission of doing drugs is not?

[RobVarak]

I find it funny that they dug up her hubby's DUI from when he was 22. Why is that an issue but Obama's own admission of doing drugs is not?

To be fair, everything I've seen about it was in stories about what Palin disclosed during the vetting process. I don't know that anyone has claimed to dig it up.

[matthewk]

Otherwise, it just shows that there are a lot of issues with the pick of Palin (and possibly w/McCain's judgment in choosing her as running mate).

Exactly. It is McCain's judgment that everyone should be questioning. What's going to happen if he get's in the White House and has to make Supreme Court appointments?

Rev. Wright
Bill Ayers
Tony Resko
etc...

[Brando70]

LOL, Web, that is awesome. Palin does have a tough record on dealing with Cylons. But I don't trust McCain's judgment in the presence of blonde Sixes wearing revealing outfits.

[RobVarak]

LOL, Web, that is awesome. Palin does have a tough record on dealing with Cylons. But I don't trust McCain's judgment in the presence of blonde Sixes wearing revealing outfits.

I don't trust anyone's judgment in that situation.

And despite the physical differences, Obama = Gaius Baltar

Messiah complex, glib, doesn't even know his own murky background, ultimately resonsible for the destruction of the world.

Ok, maybe the last one is a stretch

[Jared]

Rev. Wright
Bill Ayers
Tony Resko
etc...

I'll quote myself on this point, which seems to be brought up repeatedly.

First, there have been a lot of posts trying to link Obama to corruption, either saying he's a "product of the corrupt Chicago machine" or mentioning Rezko. As for Rezko, Obama answered every question from the Chicago Tribune in a 90+ minute interview about it (link to the summary here and the actual interview here. There's no evidence of wrongdoing by Obama, no investigations into unethical behavior by Obama, etc. People are trying to use the guilt by association argument with Obama...that if he dealt with a corrput politican, he MUST be a corrput politician too. Or if he worked with Ayers (on a board with a bunch of Republicans), he must somehow share Ayers' most insane viewpoints. Or if his pastor was Wright, he must share Wright's most radical beliefs. Or that he must be a closet socialist because...well, I don't even know why.

Anyways, if anyone has any actual evidence that Obama is corrput (investigations, documentary evidence, etc.) then go for it, produce it. But all of this above is just a silly game of six degrees of corrput/extreme politician. And you can play this game with ANY political candidate.

Furthermore, Obama didn't pick Wright, Ayers, or Rezko to be his VP, future cabinet members, etc. There is a very, very clear difference.