OT: Elections/Politics thread, part 4

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:25 am

GTHobbes wrote:I really do wonder why McCain picked this lady in the first place, other than the fact that she looks good in a skirt. Hopefully she changes my mind in tonight's debate.

Because she has a track record as a reformer. She's done a lot of good for her home state and has the record to back it up.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:32 am

matthewk wrote:
GTHobbes wrote:I really do wonder why McCain picked this lady in the first place, other than the fact that she looks good in a skirt. Hopefully she changes my mind in tonight's debate.
Because she has a track record as a reformer. She's done a lot of good for her home state and has the record to back it up.

That doesn't matter. All that matters is her ability to answer questions from a reporter. f*** her record. She can't pass a media pop quiz. Therefore, she's a joke.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:33 am

I wonder how many of these types of questions other VPs recieved. Did Gore get grilled on Supreme Court decisions?

The Bush doctrine question was a poor one. She answered that one fine, given how it was presented to her.

Who cares about what newspapers she reads? She didn't want to specify. Do people think she's never read a newpaper or something?

I will admit that she hasn't always given the best answers, but a month ago she was just the Governor of Alaska. Why does everyone think that after a couple of weeks she should know everything about everything all of a sudden?

I can pick out examples of Biden making "scary" comments that don't fit under the umbrella of gaffes. How about his saying that there would ne no more coal plants in the US, while Obama was saying there would be. How is that any better then a Plain comment on Pakistan?

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:37 am

Teal wrote:
Jared wrote:
Teal wrote:When has Obama ever faced one of these quizzes? Never. When has Biden? Never.
Biden was presented with the same question. It was part of a series, where Couric asked the same questions to both Palin and Biden. They also did the same thing with Obama and McCain.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/ ... 3062.shtml

Couric: Are there Supreme Court decisions you disagree with?

Biden: You know, I'm the guy who wrote the Violence Against Women Act. And I said that every woman in America, if they are beaten and abused by a man, should be able to take that person to court - meaning you should be able to go to federal court and sue in federal court the man who abused you if you can prove that abuse. But they said, "No, that a woman, there's no federal jurisdiction." And I held, they acknowledged, I held about 1,000 hours of hearings proving that there's an effect in interstate commerce.
Women who are abused and beaten and beaten are women who are not able to be in the work force. And the Supreme Court said, "Well, there is an impact on commerce, but this is federalizing a private crime and we're not going to allow it." I think the Supreme Court was wrong about that decision.
Okay. I stand corrected...on this one...

He should know the answer. He's been sitting in Washington longer than McCain. I wonder how well he'd answer questions related to running a business or a state.

Better yet, they should put Palin and Biden in cars with manual transmissions. I bet Biden wouldn't even know how to start it

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:42 am

Teal wrote:Yeah, really. How can she survive the bullshit of Washington without being a good bullshitter?

True. I never even knew they had televisions in 1929 until good 'ol Joe told me so.

That to me is more than just a gaffe. It's just plain stupid.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:43 am

As if Obama didn't have enough television stations already:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/ ... annel.html

Here's the first episode:

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/J7Kznmrc3o4&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

webdanzer · Post by **webdanzer** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:51 am

Teal wrote:As if Obama didn't have enough television stations already:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/ ... annel.html

I think that's pretty clever, actually. Someone's flipping through the channels, catches OBAMA listed as a channel, and very possibly pays attention long enough to hear the 2 minute economic plan.

Also, I would have to guess a huge portion of chronic channel surfers would fall into the coveted 'Undecided' category anyway, right?

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 11:59 am

matthewk wrote:I wonder how many of these types of questions other VPs recieved. Did Gore get grilled on Supreme Court decisions?

The Bush doctrine question was a poor one. She answered that one fine, given how it was presented to her.

Who cares about what newspapers she reads? She didn't want to specify. Do people think she's never read a newpaper or something?

I will admit that she hasn't always given the best answers, but a month ago she was just the Governor of Alaska. Why does everyone think that after a couple of weeks she should know everything about everything all of a sudden?

I can pick out examples of Biden making "scary" comments that don't fit under the umbrella of gaffes. How about his saying that there would ne no more coal plants in the US, while Obama was saying there would be. How is that any better then a Plain comment on Pakistan?

Being off-message is scary? Biden has been off message a few things and the Obama campaign had to reign him in.

Palin Pakistan answer wasn't scary it was just off-message from McCain.

Ultimately all the blame for Palin's unreadyness is on the shoulders of McCain. They frankly have done a horrendous job of prepping her.

When the VP pulls McCain from the brink of death prior to the convention, and they squander all that support, that's not Palin's fault.

They blamed the media that they were attacking Palin. That actually worked until her first interview. The cracks started to show after the first.

She now we are at the point of her second interview. She was traveling with McCain's senior aides so there was time to prep her more.

Instead she give startling non-answers. She shouldn't know everything but she should be more ready than this.

She might have energized the base for McCain but this isn't about them this year. And because of her non-answers, and the fact they hid her, she's doing more damage to his campaign than helping. She's no winning independents the key demographic for McCain.

And if you look at 538.com, McCain is sliding really fast. The Palin effect is over for whatever reason.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:22 pm

JRod wrote:
And if you look at 538.com, McCain is sliding really fast. The Palin effect is over for whatever reason.

I don't know that there was a distinct "Palin effect" which was distinguishable from the standard post-convention bounce. And the bounce always fades.

The real problem has been the last week, where the polls went from their pre-convention numbers to substantially more favorable to Obama. I think that Palin was a neglgible factor when compared to the economy during that period. These aren't the types of numbers that a VP pick can overcome.

McCain's going to need an October miracle at this point. He's running out of undecideds in the swing states, and people traditionally don't change their mind once they decide.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:23 pm

matthewk wrote: a month ago she was just the Governor of Alaska. Why does everyone think that after a couple of weeks she should know everything about everything all of a sudden?

We don't expect her to know everything as Governor of Alaska, but as possible VP, next in line to run our country...she should know these things. These are BASIC questions you everyone in this thread could answer:

-Give ONE EXAMPLE of a Supreme Court case
-Give ONE EXAMPLE of what you read to stay informed
-Give ONE EXAMPLE of McCain's reforms (forget the exact question)
-Agree with the "Bush Doctrine"?

It's amazing how many answers Palin has given that have nothing whatsoever to do with the question that was asked. I know that is basic politician-speak 101, but she takes it to a whole other level. Reminds me of this other fellow beauty queen contestant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lj3iNxZ8Dww

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:34 pm

JRod wrote: The Palin effect is over for whatever reason.

The reason is pretty clear. Something to do with "lipstick and a pig"???

Once we got past her "folksy, everyday people" - charm, we found what was lurking under the surface....not too much. I find it amazing that most Republican's are willing to ignore her "non-answers" and complete lack of knowledge on anything that doesn't involve caribou's or the "Northern Slope" . If she was on the Dem's ticket, they would be ripping her a new one.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:36 pm

JackB1 wrote:
JRod wrote: The Palin effect is over for whatever reason.
The reason is pretty clear. Something to do with "lipstick and a pig"???

Once we got past her "folksy, everyday people" - charm, we found what was lurking under the surface....not too much. I find it amazing that most Republican's are willing to ignore her "non-answers" and complete lack of knowledge on anything that doesn't involve caribou's or the "Northern Slope" . If she was on the Dem's ticket, they would be ripping her a new one.

Wow...you got that from a few soundbites, Jack? PM me and tell me how you do that...

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:40 pm

JackB1 wrote:
matthewk wrote: a month ago she was just the Governor of Alaska. Why does everyone think that after a couple of weeks she should know everything about everything all of a sudden?
We don't expect her to know everything as Governor of Alaska, but as possible VP, next in line to run our country...she should know these things. These are BASIC questions you everyone in this thread could answer:

-Give ONE EXAMPLE of a Supreme Court case
-Give ONE EXAMPLE of what you read to stay informed
-Give ONE EXAMPLE of McCain's reforms (forget the exact question)
-Agree with the "Bush Doctrine"?

You really think everyone here could've answered all of those questions? I can prove you wrong right now. I don't know the answers to all of those. I did get the 2nd one though

You said yourself that you don't expect her to know these things as Governor of Alaska. She was just that only a few weeks ago. Maybe she should know all of these things, but does she need to know them right now? If elected, she wouldn't be the VP until next year.

How exactly is know the correct definition of the Bush doctrine going to prove she can help lead our country as VP?

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:42 pm

Teal wrote:Wow...you got that from a few soundbites, Jack? PM me and tell me how you do that...

I watched every one of her interviews in complete, that they have shown on Nat'l TV (Gibson's & Couric's). What else do I have to go by? These aren't "soundbites" taken out of context Teal. These are complete interviews with complete questions and answers. If you want to look the other way and feel good about her being our VP, then that's your choice. But I don't think that America is going to agree with you.

If Palin doesn't right her sinking ship in tonite's debate, it could be very damaging to the campaign, since her lack of knowledge is a direct reflection on McCain, who choose her out of all the qualified candidates.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:44 pm

This is the way to win the hearts of the people-get out the idiot vote!
http://www2.facethestate.com/articles/d ... minorities

From the memo:

The document outlines specific tasks for various members of the state's liberal infrastructure, including a campaign to "educate the idiots," assigned to the state's AFL-CIO union. Among the operation's intended targets: "minorities, GED's, drop-outs."

Shameless. But par for the course.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:46 pm

matthewk wrote: She was just that only a few weeks ago. Maybe she should know all of these things, but does she need to know them right now? If elected, she wouldn't be the VP until next year.

So I should judge her based on what she plans on learning in the upcoming month's before she is in office? Could you imagine if you walked into an interview and used this same strategy? "Gee Mr. Human Resource Director...I don't know anything about welding right now, but I will learn between now and when I report for my first day. So do I get the job?"

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:52 pm

JackB1 wrote:
Teal wrote:Wow...you got that from a few soundbites, Jack? PM me and tell me how you do that...
I watched every one of her interviews in complete, that they have shown on Nat'l TV (Gibson's & Couric's). What else do I have to go by? These aren't "soundbites" taken out of context Teal. These are complete interviews with complete questions and answers. If you want to look the other way and feel good about her being our VP, then that's your choice. But I don't think that America is going to agree with you.

If Palin doesn't right her sinking ship in tonite's debate, it could be very damaging to the campaign, since her lack of knowledge is a direct reflection on McCain, who choose her out of all the qualified candidates.

Give one example of a Supreme Court case-this is a blatant misrepresentation of the interview question...I watched it, too, Jack. You wanna rephrase before I do it for you?

Give one example of what you read to stay informed-how is an answer to this question helpful to the country? In any way? THIS is a 'gotcha' question, because she wanted her to say 'worldnetdaily' or Fox News, or something other than the objective, fair minded Katie Couric...

Give one example of McCain reforms-hey, I've got one for you. Give me one example of Obama's reforms; one bill he's authored in the senate. I won't hold my breath.

The Bush Doctrine-this is really a stupid example. You think YOU know what the Bush Doctrine is, but I've already made it clear, via Charles Krauthammer, that neither you nor Charlie Gibson know what it is, because it is far more complex, for one thing, than the simpleton "preemptive war" baloney you guys like to spout. Furthermore, the 'Bush Doctrine' is a line created by Krauthammer, not a policy statement by the administration...it's a MEDIA LINE.

This is just partisanship, and that's fine. Just be honest about it, that's all I ask.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:52 pm

Posting from my Treo, so I'll get to this later in detail, but I just watched Biden's Couric interview.

he may have been more poised than Palin, but he apparently knows even less about Constitutional law than she does. It wont resonate because most people don't know much more either and Couric let him slide even when he was obviously bs'ing, but these are pretty shocking given his alleged expertise and experience.

I haven't checked, but Volkh or Ann Althouse or one of the ConLaw bloggers should take a look at this.

More later if I have the energy...

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 12:55 pm

RobVarak wrote:Posting from my Treo, so I'll get to this later in detail, but I just watched Biden's Couric interview.

he may have been more poised than Palin, but he apparently knows even less about Constitutional law than she does. It wont resonate because most people don't know much more either and Couric let him slide even when he was obviously bs'ing, but these are pretty shocking given his alleged expertise and experience.

I haven't checked, but Volkh or Ann Althouse or one of the ConLaw bloggers should take a look at this.

More later if I have the energy...

They won't make hay out of Biden's lack of knowledge, because it doesn't help their cause.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:05 pm

Teal wrote:
Give one example of a Supreme Court case-this is a blatant misrepresentation of the interview question...I watched it, too, Jack. You wanna rephrase before I do it for you?

Give one example of what you read to stay informed-how is an answer to this question helpful to the country? In any way? THIS is a 'gotcha' question, because she wanted her to say 'worldnetdaily' or Fox News, or something other than the objective, fair minded Katie Couric...

Give one example of McCain reforms-hey, I've got one for you. Give me one example of Obama's reforms; one bill he's authored in the senate. I won't hold my breath.

The Bush Doctrine-this is really a stupid example. You think YOU know what the Bush Doctrine is, but I've already made it clear, via Charles Krauthammer, that neither you nor Charlie Gibson know what it is, because it is far more complex, for one thing, than the simpleton "preemptive war" baloney you guys like to spout. Furthermore, the 'Bush Doctrine' is a line created by Krauthammer, not a policy statement by the administration...it's a MEDIA LINE.

This is just partisanship, and that's fine. Just be honest about it, that's all I ask.

The Supreme Court question asked her for ONE DECISION she disagreed with. So I guess she agrees with them all, since she couldn't come up with one?

The "Stay Informed" question....how about Time or US News and World Report, Newsweek? Heck, even USA Today would have been better than
saying nothing.

On Obama's reforms...how about the "Legislative Transparancy & Accountabilty Act"
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:s.1.es:

The Bush Doctrine is more of a concept that she should have known. She clearly had that "deer in headlights" look on that one.

You want to cry "partisanship" because it's your candidate and I understand that. But she has show a pattern of throwing out general, broad ideas and when questioned for examples, she falters. You obviously see it differently than I do and that's fine.

JRod · Post by **JRod** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:07 pm

RobVarak wrote:Posting from my Treo, so I'll get to this later in detail, but I just watched Biden's Couric interview.

he may have been more poised than Palin, but he apparently knows even less about Constitutional law than she does. It wont resonate because most people don't know much more either and Couric let him slide even when he was obviously bs'ing, but these are pretty shocking given his alleged expertise and experience.

I haven't checked, but Volkh or Ann Althouse or one of the ConLaw bloggers should take a look at this.

More later if I have the energy...

The Biden interview wasn't lack of knowledge it was spin. He tried to put a bill he sponsored that would help with women voters.

It was pretty clear what that was.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:10 pm

Just watched the Biden interview with Couric. Tell you what, go watch that objectively(if that can be done), and then get back to me about Palin's performance. He sounds slick, but it's just a more polished turd. And he's had 35 years to polish that turd.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:11 pm

JRod wrote:
RobVarak wrote:Posting from my Treo, so I'll get to this later in detail, but I just watched Biden's Couric interview.

he may have been more poised than Palin, but he apparently knows even less about Constitutional law than she does. It wont resonate because most people don't know much more either and Couric let him slide even when he was obviously bs'ing, but these are pretty shocking given his alleged expertise and experience.

I haven't checked, but Volkh or Ann Althouse or one of the ConLaw bloggers should take a look at this.

More later if I have the energy...
The Biden interview wasn't lack of knowledge it was spin. He tried to put a bill he sponsored that would help with women voters.

It was pretty clear what that was.

..of course it is...

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:30 pm

XXXIV wrote:Reading these threads. I am sold. You have all convinced me.

McCain, Obama,Biden and Palin are all morons. The USA is going to hell.

So where should I move? Canada? Greece? England? All are viable options. Thanks in advance.

Definitely not England. You should hear what the Brits say about their current PM and the one before him.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Thu Oct 02, 2008 1:40 pm

Teal wrote:This is the way to win the hearts of the people-get out the idiot vote!
http://www2.facethestate.com/articles/d ... minorities

From the memo:

The document outlines specific tasks for various members of the state's liberal infrastructure, including a campaign to "educate the idiots," assigned to the state's AFL-CIO union. Among the operation's intended targets: "minorities, GED's, drop-outs."
Shameless. But par for the course.

But not quite as bad as the 2004 election rigging in Ohio.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/ ... ion_stolen