OT: Elections/Politics thread, part 5

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:12 pm

Am I the only one who cringed at the irony of Alec Baldwin walking arm-in-arm with Sarah Palin on "Saturday Night Live?"

I wonder if Baldwin even spoke to her off-camera other than a curt introduction.

Take care,
PK

EZSnappin · Post by **EZSnappin** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:16 pm

pk500 wrote:Am I the only one who cringed at the irony of Alec Baldwin walking arm-in-arm with Sarah Palin on "Saturday Night Live?"

I wonder if Baldwin even spoke to her off-camera other than a curt introduction.

Take care,
PK

He reportedly said to her - "You are way hotter in person!" which wouldn't be a surprising salutation from any of the Baldwins. I think/hope they wisely stayed away from politics.

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:18 pm

Obama is not off to a very good start leading...

He says dont be cocky...the very next day his supporters are throwing a victory party.

If he cant get his most ardent supporters to listen to him it doesnt look good.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:46 pm

Jared wrote:
I'm no McCain supporter, but here's what I'll say:

You NEVER base any kind of anything on the results of one poll. For example, that poll's got a margin of error of +/- 3 points. It's much better to look at an aggregate of polls, and even better to use models that take into account the biases of those polls. And even then, national polls don't mean much; state polls are where it's at. If you want to look at poll data, go here:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com

(BTW, they've got Obama w/a 93% chance to win.)

And please, don't phrase anything at other posters to "what are you gonna say now"...that is pretty taunt-y.

93% sounds like pretty good odds to me

I'll take that over the polls anyday! I was just citing that one poll in particular because it has historically been the most favorable towards McCain out of all of them. That was my point.

Sorry if I was being "taunt-y". I didn't mean for it to come out that way.

JackB1 · Post by **JackB1** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 5:52 pm

pk500 wrote:Am I the only one who cringed at the irony of Alec Baldwin walking arm-in-arm with Sarah Palin on "Saturday Night Live?"

I wonder if Baldwin even spoke to her off-camera other than a curt introduction.

Take care,
PK

It was comical indeed. I would love to know what Baldwin was thinking at that moment. I would think if he really despised her, he wouldn't have consented to appear alongside her.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:44 pm

JackB1 wrote:It was comical indeed. I would love to know what Baldwin was thinking at that moment. I would think if he really despised her, he wouldn't have consented to appear alongside her.

He does despise her, but he also know NBC signs his checks for "30 Rock."

Take care,
PK

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 6:45 pm

EZSnappin wrote:
pk500 wrote:Am I the only one who cringed at the irony of Alec Baldwin walking arm-in-arm with Sarah Palin on "Saturday Night Live?"

I wonder if Baldwin even spoke to her off-camera other than a curt introduction.

Take care,
PK
He reportedly said to her - "You are way hotter in person!" which wouldn't be a surprising salutation from any of the Baldwins. I think/hope they wisely stayed away from politics.

He could have called her a filthy little pig -- that was good enough for his own daughter.

Take care,
PK

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:23 pm

You can think someone is not right for a political office but still think they are a good person. I can think of a lot of people I like a lot who I would never vote for.

Palin's appearance on SNL was pretty funny. She was a good spot about the jokes and did a good job herself.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:41 pm

Brando70 wrote:You can think someone is not right for a political office but still think they are a good person. I can think of a lot of people I like a lot who I would never vote for.

Palin's appearance on SNL was pretty funny. She was a good spot about the jokes and did a good job herself.

Doubt that's the case with Baldwin, since he has been so stridently anti-Bush and anti-GOP. Ever read his drivel at The Huffington Post? Remember his "I'm leaving for Canada if Bush is elected" pap from the 2004 presidential election?

I thought Palin was excellent. A good sport indeed. Plus she's still a GILF.

Take care,
PK

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:41 pm

Brando70 wrote:You can think someone is not right for a political office but still think they are a good person.

Or, like me, you can assume that anyone who runs for political office is inherently f-ed up

Not necessarily bad or good, but definitely f-ed up! LOL

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Mon Oct 20, 2008 7:59 pm

RobVarak wrote:LMAO Powell has been villified for years as an incredible lie-merchant spreading the Gospel According to W. But now that he supports The One his credibility is beyond reproach.

It's been a fun election season.

Now this.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/ ... 1879.shtml

Let me get this right. Obama used Hillary's vote for the war in Iraq in his campaign aginist her,then picked a running mate that voted for the war as well. Now he wants the guy that helped sell Congress on going into Iraq as an advisor?

Spielberg's envious he didn't think of this.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 2:26 am

Well, HERE'S a twist:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/20 ... 1447.shtml

I figure Obama and Biden don't want to say anything else stupid like 'paying higher taxes is patriotic' or 'I want to spread the wealth around'...

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 2:37 am

Meanwhile, Powell's son chooses McCain:
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/col ... 10-20.html

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 6:27 am

Teal wrote:Well, HERE'S a twist:
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/20 ... 1447.shtml

I figure Obama and Biden don't want to say anything else stupid like 'paying higher taxes is patriotic' or 'I want to spread the wealth around'...

Fear not! Biden is talking. Yesterday.

"Gird Your Loins"

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar ... uppor.html

Sounds like Biden still believes what he said doing his campaign to win the nomination.

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fpjAs4vtc1w&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 8:18 am

This is for all of us that pay taxes that go to this bullshit. Go to the 3 min mark or watch it all.

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/625jUE78zjE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

ACORN is non-partisan.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec3_1223880874
Again go to the 3 min mark.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 8:53 am

JackDog wrote:This is for all of us that pay taxes that go to this bullshit. Go to the 3 min mark or watch it all.

<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/625jUE78zjE&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed>

ACORN is non-partisan.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec3_1223880874
Again go to the 3 min mark.

Neither video is a surprise, though I'm glad they're out there, but man...that woman being interviewed on Fox is an idiot. If the speakers on both videos are ACORN standouts, then God help the education system in America...we've failed more than I thought.

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:21 am

Well this has devolved into sort of an anti-Obama link dump. Anyone got anything positive to contribute? I don't know... if you're worried about the Dems holding all three branches of government, are there any independently minded Repubs out there running for congress that you can get behind, or even plan to contribute to?

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:28 am

Slumberland wrote:Well this has devolved into sort of an anti-Obama link dump. Anyone got anything positive to contribute? I don't know... if you're worried about the Dems holding all three branches of government, are there any independently minded Repubs out there running for congress that you can get behind, or even plan to contribute to?

LOL Most of the Obama supporters are confident enough to sit back and enjoy...unlike Pelosi, they don't want to presume anything, I think.

Naples39 · Post by **Naples39** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:35 am

I thought Obama was for a new kind of politics? Apparently it's still the same old crap with his campaign, and I for one am highly offended;
Obama supporting Rays AND Phillies in World Series

GTHobbes · Post by **GTHobbes** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:41 am

Slumberland wrote:Well this has devolved into sort of an anti-Obama link dump. Anyone got anything positive to contribute? I don't know... if you're worried about the Dems holding all three branches of government, are there any independently minded Repubs out there running for congress that you can get behind, or even plan to contribute to?

Good post, Slumber...and good questions. This thread has become rather boring over the last week or so. I know it's only Rolling Stone, but an article I read in the new issue last night was saying this could be a real bloodbath for Repubs as far as losing their seats in the House and Senate. Are there any good congressional candidates who are being overlooked and are worth talking about?

Slumberland · Post by **Slumberland** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 9:41 am

RobVarak wrote:
Slumberland wrote:Well this has devolved into sort of an anti-Obama link dump. Anyone got anything positive to contribute? I don't know... if you're worried about the Dems holding all three branches of government, are there any independently minded Repubs out there running for congress that you can get behind, or even plan to contribute to?
LOL Most of the Obama supporters are confident enough to sit back and enjoy...unlike Pelosi, they don't want to presume anything, I think.

Heh... I'm sort of confident, but I also don't want to approach it like some sporting event. In fact I've spent a lot of time asking fellow Obama voters how they would categorize giving a tax break to people who don't pay income tax. They tend to change the subject.

These days I'm slightly more interested in how the conservative movement might realign itself. I think tax-and-spend is slightly more responsible than borrow-and-spend, so I fall into the dem category for now, but obviously it's not ideal.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:09 am

GTHobbes wrote:
Slumberland wrote:Well this has devolved into sort of an anti-Obama link dump. Anyone got anything positive to contribute? I don't know... if you're worried about the Dems holding all three branches of government, are there any independently minded Repubs out there running for congress that you can get behind, or even plan to contribute to?
Good post, Slumber...and good questions. This thread has become rather boring over the last week or so. I know it's only Rolling Stone, but an article I read in the new issue last night was saying this could be a real bloodbath for Repubs as far as losing their seats in the House and Senate. Are there any good congressional candidates who are being overlooked and are worth talking about?

The new issue of Esquire (with Halle Berry on the cover) has an endorsement section for every member of Congress across the country, as well as their 10 best and 10 worst Congressmen. It's more entertaining than persuasive but still pretty interesting.

At this point, I'm not sure what else can be said that hasn't been said already about the presidential candidates. So how about a few laughs instead? My favorite SNL political sketch of all time, "Dukakis After Dark."

http://snltranscripts.jt.org/88/88ddukakis.phtml

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:29 am

Brando70 wrote:
The new issue of Esquire (with Halle Berry on the cover) has an endorsement section for every member of Congress across the country, as well as their 10 best and 10 worst Congressmen. It's more entertaining than persuasive but still pretty interesting.

I agree. It was entertaining seeing how they could manage to justify picking the Democrat in 99% of the races despite knowing absolutely nothing about the respective candidates

Stay tuned for my endorsements for next year's Nobel prize for physics...

That Dukakis skit is classic. I love the Reagan skit with all the Yasir Arafat puns.

Brando70 · Post by **Brando70** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:32 am

Slumberland wrote:Heh... I'm sort of confident, but I also don't want to approach it like some sporting event. In fact I've spent a lot of time asking fellow Obama voters how they would categorize giving a tax break to people who don't pay income tax. They tend to change the subject.

It's a rebate to the poor. And I don't see what the big deal is.

I know people like to throw the "S" word around any time the government takes something from people with a lot and gives it to people without very much. In the conservative world, the government can spend money on killing foreigners, paving roads, and delivering tons of unsolicited marketing material to your mailbox. But the minute the government does anything charitable, they drag out the Karl Marx pinata and beat it with the socialism stick.

I understand if someone is philosophically opposed to giving a tax refund to someone who doesn't pay taxes. I'm not exactly crazy about it. I'm more for bringing back work-based New Deal kinds of programs, where you have to earn your welfare. If you're unemployed, you can pick up a broom and sweep your street. But that seems even less fashionable than handing somebody a check and foodstamps.

These rebates are not really going to alter much. The poorest Americans will still be poor. The rich will remain rich. People in the middle, like me, probably won't notice the difference. That doesn't exactly sound like a Bolshevik revolution to me.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Oct 21, 2008 10:36 am

Brando70 wrote:
These rebates are not really going to alter much. The poorest Americans will still be poor. The rich will remain rich. People in the middle, like me, probably won't notice the difference. That doesn't exactly sound like a Bolshevik revolution to me.

Take it from Teal's favorite Socialist:

"The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism,but under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of it, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."-Norman Thomas