Elixir Sue Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 And how is criticism a "slap in the face?"Criticism itself is not a slap in the face; your refusal to acknowledge that Obama has run an impressive campaign is (IMO). You don't have to be an Obama supporter or a democrat to see that he's exceeded all expectations, and strategically his campaign has been a success. Hell, I've loved him from day one, and he's exceeded MY expectations. Can you not give credit where credit is due? Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Criticism itself is not a slap in the face; your refusal to acknowledge that Obama has run an impressive campaign is (IMO). You don't have to be an Obama supporter or a democrat to see that he's exceeded all expectations, and strategically his campaign has been a success. Hell, I've loved him from day one, and he's exceeded MY expectations. Can you not give credit where credit is due? Has McCain also run an impressive campaign? He was 4th in most polls before the primaries began. Will you give credit where credit is due? Exceeding expectations doesn't necessarily mean you have run a great campaign. He's run a successful campaign, but he's had a lot working in his favor over the last 18 months. It hasn't been nearly as uphill of a battle as a lot of his supporters think. I have a friend who wrote this long thing on facebook about how he is the most influential figure in American history since JFK, and how beating Hillary was the biggest upset ever in American politics. I disagree. You can argue if you want, but the way I see it, the media as a whole has been very easy on him and has shown him a lot more favorably than Hillary in the primaries or McCain now. This ties into the whole "rock star" thing the media has been pushing, which I think has helped. I think alot of his success has been based on the "change" message and the fact that he physically is different than what we've had before. He's run a good campaign as far as taking advantage of these things, but I don't think it's some historic campaign that people will be looking at to study how to fight an uphill battle and win when the deck was stacked. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 United States presidential election, 2000 United States presidential election, 2004 Link to post Share on other sites
explodo Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 You followers of the Chosen One sure are a cocky bunch. All I'm sayin', is that the next 2 years could potentially be the most left this country has ever been. That ain't gonna last long.I don't understand why you're so confident in that. That is all I'm saying. Bush and Rove have created a massive new coalition for the Democrats that is now and will be coming into voting age over the next eight years. If an Obama Presidency can convince, in the first term, a 20 year old kid that it is helping our country, I don't see that kid voting Republican any time soon. I'm 24. The years of my politically aware life have, incidentally, been the Bush years. My entire family is conservative, outside of my 26 year-old brother and me. Not a coincidence. How many more people like me are out there? If Obama swings us left in a harsh and grinding manner, you are likely right. If he steers the ship with the same cool and resolve he has shown campaigning, the right is in trouble. Bush and Rove have, very possibly, woken a sleeping giant (to steal that possibly not real quote from Admiral Yamamoto). Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Didn't we go over the race thing a few days ago? But when you talk about the close poll numbers you have to discuss this because it is ahuge component. And the current system works so much better. Wait, don't you make you living working to reduce the effective tax rate of you clients? Affording to pay and actually correcting the tax code to induce these 'fat-cats' to pay a larger share are two completely different things. Use taxes are inherently unfair to a huge majority of the population as are flat taxes. No I do not work to reduce the effective tax rate for any clients now or in the past. The rate is what it is after taxes are calculated (both deferred and current). I work to help them calculate the correct tax liability they should be paying, though now I work for a fortune 50 company so I have a client base of one. And my job is to help achieve the lowest possible tax working within the current laws. And complex as it is, yes the current system is much much better than flat and use tax systems which will raise taxes for most of the people in our country, i.e. the middle class. Is it the best system? I don't know and I won't know until the alternatives are shown. Link to post Share on other sites
jakobnicholas Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 It's a good thing you don't work for Webster's because that would be a synonym not a definition. However, neither apply anyway. I know you're trying to be funny, but that's so Demorat of you to point that out. Link to post Share on other sites
Elixir Sue Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Has McCain also run an impressive campaign? He was 4th in most polls before the primaries began. Will you give credit where credit is due?Are you talking about his campaign during the primaries? I have to admit, I was surprised he got the Republican nomination, but looking at the field, he was probably the best hope they had. As far as his campaign in the general election, it hasn't been impressive at all...there's the baffling choice of Sarah Palin as running mate, there's the completely disgusting, negative tone that McCain has not only allowed but has encouraged, there's the endless stream of lies that has come out of his campaign (which he stands by at all costs), there's the indecisiveness which has resulted in bizarre moves along the way (suspending the campaign so he can go to D.C. to deal with the crisis??)...need I go on and on? So no, I don't think he has run an impressive campaign. Exceeding expectations doesn't necessarily mean you have run a great campaign. He's run a successful campaign, but he's had a lot working in his favor over the last 18 months. It hasn't been nearly as uphill of a battle as a lot of his supporters think. I have a friend who wrote this long thing on facebook about how he is the most influential figure in American history since JFK, and how beating Hillary was the biggest upset ever in American politics. I disagree.Fair enough. I don't think it's some historic campaign that people will be looking at to study how to fight an uphill battle and win when the deck was stacked.I disagree. Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 So if he's running this unbelievably amazing, unprecedented campaign, then the logical answer is that Americans just don't agree with the democratic platform, isn't it? At least, not enough for their candidate to get a big majority on a national scale. I think everyone agrees that the Bush presidency has been terrible, and yet they can't get more than a 5% polling lead nationally? Sure, they'll win the electoral college, but I'm talking more on a national scale. And how is criticism a "slap in the face?" Or, as is human nature, fear is an even better motivator than hope (which is not to say I agree that Obama will deliver on the hope or the change, both being empty campaign slogans) Link to post Share on other sites
John Smith Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 If Obama swings us left in a harsh and grinding manner, you are likely right. If he steers the ship with the same cool and resolve he has shown campaigning, the right is in trouble. Bush and Rove have, very possibly, woken a sleeping giant (to steal that possibly not real quote from Admiral Yamamoto). That is the key statement in yoru response. From what I gather, any policy not eminating from the far right willswing us left in a harsh and grinding manner. It's why they "fear" an Obama presidency. The fear is from the knowledge that he will enact polciy and any polciy he enacts will be leftist and hated by the right, even if it is a continuation of a Bush policy they will hate it. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 If the Democratic nominee has as much charisma, intelligence, and political savvy as our current one...and if he was also good looking and WHITE, he would be destroying McCain. We all know that many people in this country agree with him, but simply will not vote for a black man. Personally, I think he is destroying him now. The effects of voter purging and actual turnout are yet to be quantifiable. What percentage of newly registered voters will turn out? How many voters will not be allowed to vote? 1 month ago, Obama didn't have a chance in MO. 175,000 person turnout in one day? Wow. The polls are tight, now. Today McCain is delivering a speech at a private school in the KC suburbs to a crowd maybe 15% as large. Link to post Share on other sites
kwall Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Use taxes are inherently unfair to a huge majority of the population as are flat taxes.the only fair thing would be to insure that everyone has exactly the same net income. Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 If the Democratic nominee has as much charisma, intelligence, and political savvy as our current one...and if he was also good looking and WHITE, he would be destroying McCain. We all know that many people in this country agree with him, but simply will not vote for a black man. Personally, I think he is destroying him now. The effects of voter purging and actual turnout are yet to be quantifiable. What percentage of newly registered voters will turn out? How many voters will not be allowed to vote? 1 month ago, Obama didn't have a chance in MO. 175,000 person turnout in one day? Wow. The polls are tight, now. Today McCain is delivering a speech at a private school in the KC suburbs to a crowd maybe 15% as large. He's here. Belton, of all places. Link to post Share on other sites
fatheadfred Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I know you're trying to be funny, but that's so Demorat of you to point that out.As was it so Republican of you to not understand Jon Stewart does political comedy and you were offended by it. Now, on the other hand, when Pat Buchanan or Rush Limbaugh makes a derogatory statement we understand they are not comics. Well, I already know they are comics so it doesn't bother me, but in your example Stewart's identity as a comedian is a little more cemented than the other two clowns. Link to post Share on other sites
jakobnicholas Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 This is something I have thought about. You are already considered a racist by a racist if your not voting O as they may assume it's based mainly on race. I know it's true in some cases, but same goes for the other side. Many will vote Obama purely for the "historic" aspect of it, his color. I've thought this too. I DO think SOME will not vote for Barack because he's black. But I also truly believe there many caucasians who will vote for him because he's black....because they honestly feel like it's time for a man of color to be elected.....and with a bland candidate like McCain on the other side, now's as good a time as any. It WILL be great as an American...on the surface....for the world to see that we do in fact give everyone a chance and will vote them to our highest office. It just kinda sucks to me that it happens to be Obama. Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Any thoughts on the fairness doctine?(forgive the link to the NY Post, please). Would this apply to late night shows (Daily Show, Cobert Report) that are comedy/satire? If so, couldn't Limbaugh, et. al. and the stations that broadast them get around the doctrine by labeling them as entertainment? Link to post Share on other sites
Central Scrutinizer Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 So let me get this straight: 1. I need to turn in all my Wilco albums, etc. if Obama wins the election.2. If I don Link to post Share on other sites
kwall Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Any thoughts on the fairness doctine?it's unconstitutional. Link to post Share on other sites
embiggen Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Affording to pay and actually correcting the tax code to induce these 'fat-cats' to pay a larger share are two completely different things. how so? that's part of the goal, right? also, I seriously doubt that paying higher income taxes is going to impede anyone making "1 million plus a year's" ability to buy more stuff. Link to post Share on other sites
Party @ the Moontower Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 My state is hanging in there for Obama. A poll by Rasmussen shows O up 6 points in MO. The Real Clear Politics average of recent polls has him up 2.5 points. My sign has only been stolen once. Go Missouri! Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 It WILL be great as an American...on the surface....for the world to see that we do in fact give everyone a chance and will vote them to our highest office. It just kinda sucks to me that it happens to be Obama. Were you holding out for Morgan Freeman? Link to post Share on other sites
jakobnicholas Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 As was it so Republican of you to not understand Jon Stewart does political comedy and you were offended by it. Now, on the other hand, when Pat Buchanan or Rush Limbaugh makes a derogatory statement we understand they are not comics. Well, I already know they are comics so it doesn't bother me, but in your example Stewart's identity as a comedian is a little more cemented than the other two clowns. (Random Democrat in the audience for a Stewart stand-up show) "Hey....did you hear that? Stewart just told Palin to fuck off.......whoo-whee.....that Stewart is a funny guy......ha-ha......that's hilarious!" Link to post Share on other sites
uncool2pillow Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 it's unconstitutional.On the surface, I agree with you. Is the precedent that establishes this? It seems that since we're really talking about broadcasting licenses, the courts could disagree. Otherwise, we'd hear all sorts of court-sanctioned profanity on the broadcast networks, right? Link to post Share on other sites
Central Scrutinizer Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Wait until he gets in office. Bush has been called every name in the book over the past 4 years.Not every word. His name has never collided in the same sentence with "effective," "leadership," "intelligent," "competent," "fair" "conscience" nor "humane". Link to post Share on other sites
Central Scrutinizer Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 What else is McCain supposed to do? After the economic meltdown, McCain dropped 10 points down. Since going negative, McCain seems to have gained 3 or 4 points. HE HAS NO CHOICE. Is he to do nothing and then lose by 15 points? His only hope is to convince Americans that Obama is inexperienced and to suggest he's a radical freak with ties to unsavory characters like Ayers and Wright. Constantly saying such things WILL put doubt in some voters' minds. If McCain loses, he'll go back to being the likeable Senator he was before. C'mon folks...McCain wants to WIN.....so he's doing the only thing can do.....which unfortunately, is to go negative. That's politics.No offense, but your rationalization here is just as twisted as the political strategy. What happened to the guy who would "rather lose an election than win a war?" He'd rather suspend morals than lose an election?!? Link to post Share on other sites
Good Old Neon Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 (Random Democrat in the audience for a Stewart stand-up show) "Hey....did you hear that? Stewart just told Palin to fuck off.......whoo-whee.....that Stewart is a funny guy......ha-ha......that's hilarious!" I Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts