Thread: US Presidential Campaign 2008

Of course polls "mean something," but yes the election is far from being won by either candidate. What does this big swing in the polls mean? Is it just a post convention bounce? Or is it the turning of the tide?

My opinion? Sarah. Will the love affair with her last? TIME WILL TELL.

Originally Posted by Norton

Originally Posted by raycarey

i look forward to reading real, unbiased national polling data taken approximately a week after the final debate.

Forget the national polls. They don't count for much. Watch the polls in the swing states. They are the key. And yes none of the polls mean much until well into October.

I would agree the polls don't really give any real indiation of who will win. But you can bet both teams watch these polls (and conduct their own) and change/ adapt things in their repsective campaigns based upon the polls.

Also they will no doubt base where/how they campaign based upon some of the state-by-state polls as well.

Also big moves in the polls (like the bounce Obama got after the blue team convention, and McCain seems to have gotten after the red team convention) get reported on national news and can effect how folks view the race at hand. This type of move can compond a bounce - say after any one of the debates. If Obama or McCain does really well in any of the up coming debates, and then get a bump in the polls. Folks who didn't even watch the debate can form opinions based upon the press reports of the debate and the effects in the polls.

The polls can also potentially effect voter turn out as well (but not polls this early in the race).

Originally Posted by pai nai ma

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

I find the level of partisanship mind boggling.

standard operating procedure in the good ol'usa. (note atta boy's long reach for silly/sorry humour (above)).

merca is a sump for racist, bigoted, know-it-all's.

How is my observation an example of partisanship? Look at the photo. They have similar facial features. If they were of the same skin color they could be brother and sister. One is white and one is black, that's where skintone conscious uptight anal retentive people squirm. And that is where the humor comes in. You're not calling me a racist, bigoted, know-it-all are you?

^ They probably are, Atta. It appears that some posters are afraid of being labeled un-PC so they have to attack anyone they perceive as racist. That's why I love injecting a few slurs -- attack their socialist hubris, I say!

Originally Posted by Norton

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

But, Norts, I'm not a liberal, am I?

Deep inside there is a liberal just waiting to burst out.
First indication is your membership on Obama's website. But even more telling is your selection of avs. Grace Slick! No self respecting "conservative" would choose her.

OK. I was a lefty liberal in my youth and I loved Grace Slick. I guess I just cannae get over it.
So, since ray carey always chooses Republicans for his av (eg, Mrs McCain, Bush/McC hug, Palin), does that mean he is really NOT a "self respecting" libbie but actually a closet Republican?

Originally Posted by Mr Earl

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

^ Inuit, baby, Inuit.

Actually Inuit is a distinction for esquimo people of the Canadian Arctic...

Thanks for the culture lesson. Can I just call them whale killers, blubber eaters and Alaskan arabs?

Originally Posted by raycarey

in short, this is why these type of tracking polls are more or less worthless.
can't you see how foolish this is....

Boy, an 11-point lead for McCain and the libbie queen is squirming and suddenly tracking polls are worthless. 555

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

It appears that some posters are afraid of being labeled un-PC so they have to attack anyone they perceive as racist.

I don't think so, "PC" has almost become a derogatory term.

I was a lefty liberal in my youth and I loved Grace Slick.

Me too, Jim Morrison rocked as well!

They probably are, Atta. It appears that some posters are afraid of being labeled un-PC so they have to attack anyone they perceive as racist. That's why I love injecting a few slurs -- attack their socialist hubris, I say!

Thanks for the culture lesson. Can I just call them whale killers, blubber eaters and Alaskan arabs?

Jet, how do you spell 'White Trash'?

Look in the mirror and say j e t g o r d o n

This has nothing to do with 'socialist hubris' or any other label that you wish to place upon people to justify your actions. Stop hiding behind labels, you make yourself look the fool time and again.

Trick question Jet: Define legal tender.

I am appalled at the kind of rubbish that comes out of your posts and am grateful that this is a virtual forum only, though in real life it is easier to avoid people like you.

White trash, pure and simple. You try your best to align yourself with what you believe to be alike-thinkers, but there really is no-one, really, is there?! Well, maybe BG, but he is witty at times.

You really are a sad person, but I would like to see a post from you actually making valid points instead of, unsuccessfully, trying to score political points in a forum where they don't exist.

Originally Posted by panama hat

Jet, how do you spell 'White Trash'?

Look in the mirror and say j e t g o r d o n

Geez, at the least, could you spell my name correctly?

Originally Posted by attaboy

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by pai nai ma

didnt see the mccain speech -- anymore characterizations from those did?

Didn't see it either but was just reading about it then. Does this:

McCain speech denounces 'partisan rancour'
ST. PAUL, Minnesota - Republican John McCain accepted the Republican presidential nomination today, warning Washington politicians that "change is coming" and denouncing the "partisan rancor" he said was gripping the country's ruling establishment.


The four-term Arizona senator was met with extended applause from delegates to the Republican National Convention and guests crammed into the Excel Energy Center and declared himself the only choice for voters who want an end to gridlock in Washington and the tradition of politicians "who work for themselves and not you"...

McCain speech denounces 'partisan rancour' - 05 Sep 2008 - NZ Herald: World / International News

sound familiar? Apparently he 'borrowed' rather liberally from Obama.

Are you saying something as silly as Obama said it first so it's his domain? Obama is not the first person to ever utter anything along those lines.

I'm saying nothing more or less than I wrote in that post, atta.

I'm not entirely sure why that would cause you difficulties, it's really quite straightforward and simple.

PH

"Trick question Jet: Define legal tender."

What the fuck does this have to do with the US elections?

Seems like Jet has gotten you panties in a knot, chill dude.

It has plenty to do with the issue at hand, I find Jet's posts unhelpful and irrelevant to the extreme, nothing but slurs and aggression.

If you don't wish to read my posts, then either skip over them or place me on ignore, it is not the first time that posts go off on tangents, nor will it be the last.

Why not ask Jet what her posts have to do with the elections . . . why not scroll back and let me know the results.


It is at this point of the campaign where debates should be aired and scheduled, let's face it, there are only a few weeks left and all the slanderous and meaningless ads - from both sides - are nothing but diversion from the issues.

Debates, let the candidates justify their worth.

Originally Posted by panama hat

If you don't wish to read my posts, then either skip over them or place me on ignore,

I've enjoyed your recent postings.

your accurate scribblings about jet deserves plenty of green, but you could always do the same for her and put her on ignore.
I've considered it, but I rather like her posts outside of the issues forum.
In here, she is consistently awful.

Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon

Originally Posted by panama hat

If you don't wish to read my posts, then either skip over them or place me on ignore,

I've enjoyed your recent postings.

your accurate scribblings about jet deserves plenty of green, but you could always do the same for her and put her on ignore.
I've considered it, but I rather like her posts outside of the issues forum.
In here, she is consistently awful.

Your opinions and you're welcome to them. I would beg to differ on all counts. The reason I get snippity here is that the misogynist lefties get pretty free rein with their comments. I think I'm one of the few chicks in issues, so I put my gloves on now and again. Some of the boys have even told me to do so. No skin off my nose.

Of recent, their campaign seems to be what you would expect of a Democratic Party nominee, as this article points out-


"Over the years, Republicans have used lots of tactics to win presidential elections. But here's one I never expected to see: running as Democrats.
That's the idea behind the latest TV spot for John McCain and Sarah Palin.

It brags about things that are generally more congenial to Democratic voters than to Reaganites. McCain, it tells us, "took on the drug industry," while Palin "took on Big Oil." It goes on: "He battled Republicans and reformed Washington. She battled Republicans and reformed Alaska." Not a word about battling Democrats. If you didn't know better, you'd think they had just been nominated by the party of Roosevelt and Clinton.

This is just the latest feint in that direction. An earlier McCain ad (video is below) said, "Washington is broken," and "We're worse off than we were four years ago"--neglecting to mention that his party has controlled the presidency for the last eight years and both houses of Congress for most of the last 14. Usually, when you say the country is worse off than it was four years ago, you're asking voters to evict the president's party.

That commercial, too, sounded themes shamelessly plagiarized from John Edwards: "Only McCain has taken on Big Tobacco, the drug companies . . . He'll reform Wall Street, battle Big Oil." Anti-capitalist populism may be dead in the Democratic party, but it seems to have found new life in the GOP.

Will this work? There's no telling, but if McCain and Palin think it's a good idea to impersonate Democrats, Barack Obama and Joe Biden might want to make sure voters know who the real Democrats are. "

Steve Chapman | Chicago Tribune | Blog

There is a certain irony that, in their best hope to get elected, the McCain Palin ticket basically has to admit that their own Republican Party has been shite for the last 8 years, and has damaged the country.

^ Ironic but not insane. They want to show a "new" "old old" party to distance themselves from Bush. Halt pork spending and corruption. Get back to personal responsibility, small government.

Originally Posted by Jet Gorgon

Get back to personal responsibility, small government.

That is a platform I would entirely support- but neither Party will deliver it.

^ You're right. Which could maybe do it a wee bit better?

Originally Posted by sabang

Of recent, their campaign seems to be what you would expect of a Democratic Party nominee, as this article points out-

Isn’t this the exact opposite of what the blue team has been saying? McCain = 4 more years of Bush; McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time.

The 90% voting with Bush bit always gets a chuckle out of me. First off because Bush is not part of the senate, he does not propose any bills for the senate to vote on (with the exception budget related items), and he does not cast any votes in the senate. McCain can not vote with Bush because Bush don’t vote. McCain has voted along party lines 90% of the time in 2007. Many feel this is damning enough and gives support to Obama’s claims that McCain is not bipartisan. But if anyone bothers to take a look at the numbers I think they’ll find Obama has voted along party lines something like 97% of the time. Some real bipartisan ship being shown there as well I guess?

FactCheck.org: FactChecking Obama

He (Obama) has voted in line with his party an average of nearly 97 percent of the time. The truth is that neither candidate can claim a strong record of "breaking with his party" if Senate votes are the measure.

So folks can choose to vote for McCain who has voted 90% of the time along party lines - the party with the President who has the worst approval rating ever.

Or folks can choose to vote for Obama who has voted 97% of the time along party lines - the party who control Congress, which has the worst approval rating ever.

Some choices?

Originally Posted by Bugs

The 90% voting with Bush bit always gets a chuckle out of me.

Originally Posted by Bugs

I think they’ll find Obama has voted along party lines something like 97% of the time. Some real bipartisan ship being shown there as well I guess?

Voting along party lines 90%+ is hardly unusual. Where they did not vote along party lines is of more interest to me.

Originally Posted by Norton

Originally Posted by Bugs

The 90% voting with Bush bit always gets a chuckle out of me.

Originally Posted by Bugs

I think they’ll find Obama has voted along party lines something like 97% of the time. Some real bipartisan ship being shown there as well I guess?

Voting along party lines 90%+ is hardly unusual. Where they did not vote along party lines is of more interest to me.

I would agree to some extent. But one of the other problems with congress right now is too much fluff gets passed that effects too few people, and not enough real wide reaching stuff is getting done to address the real problems.

Here is a guy that seems to be in the same position as some of the other independent voters out there right now:
Both Obama and McCain are wrong for president - Community Writers Blog - The Oregonian - OregonLive.com

I am in a conundrum; I do not know who to vote for president. I believe in my civic duty to understand the issues and vote. I understand the issues, I want to vote but I am troubled with both McCain and Obama's political philosophies. My choice is between American imperialism and American socialism. I think the Iraq war is a huge mistake but I abhor socialistic philosophy.

McCain supports the Iraq war which I think is a disaster. We have lost 4,000 young American lives, spent a trillion dollars, run up our federal debt, lost our good reputation, created enemies and involved ourselves in another Vietnam; and all for nothing. But like me, McCain believes in capitalism and wants to limit government and taxes. My conservative Republican bent supports McCain but I cannot brook his support of this idiotic war.

I like much about Obama. He seems honest, decent, forthright, opposes the Iraq war and preaches responsibility. These are ideas I believe in. But he is a socialist Democrat. He believes in oppressively taxing the able among us to provide for the unable. His socialist beliefs impart injustice to some, abrogate of the rule of law and bring bigger totalitarian government. I believe, for example, Obama will means test Social Security because his beliefs demand it.

A great one-liner:

What a nightmarish choice; a conservative warmonger or a liberal socialist.

^ So given the choice between stopping the war (obama) and saving some money on taxes (mccain), what does a concerned voter do?

duh.......

This article is a great little sports metaphor piece on all the press being given to Palin, and how the choice seems to be working (right now for McCain). While Biden and Obama seem to be having problems keeping their eye on the ball.

McPalin rattles Team Obama - Los Angeles Times

Barack Obama, a famous fan of pickup basketball, must recognize his plight: It's two on one now. John McCain drafted Gov. Sarah Palin, the star point guard from the Wasilla Warriors, to double-team Obama.

(McCain's team doesn't care if no one covers Joe Biden, who seems to spend most of his time yelling to the media, "I'm open! I'm open!" But when he gets the ball, all he does is talk about what a great player he is and dribble in place.)

They used to call Regan the teflon president because it seemed like no matter how much shit the other side thru at him nothing seemed to stick. Hell, he got Olly North to fall on his sword for him. Right now Palin is looking like the teflon VP candidate. Not only does nothing seem to stick (ie really seem to matter to the majority of voters) the blue team is wasting time and energy going after the #2 person on the ticket and giving the #1 person on the ticket a free ride.

The outrageous attacks on Palin out of the block (She banned books! She opposed family planning education! She's a creationist!) have missed the mark. And the eagerness of the mainstream media to go after her family life has backfired as well. For instance, the Washington Post's Hanna Rosin wrote sneeringly in Slate magazine of Palin's "wreck of a home life." Would Slate say that Obama, conceived out of wedlock to a teen mom, comes from a "wreck" of a family? I somehow doubt it.

This is kind of sad, but if McCain pulls off a win in Nov, they way things are going much of the credit will go to Palin (much more so than any past VP candidate) - MVP Palin stepping onto the floor.

Fair or not, that's how it works in the pros. But so far, it still looks as if the MVP title is hers to lose.

Suddenly, quoting blogs has become illegitimate as well, since the shoe is on the other foot! LOL