Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

McCain-Gustav '08

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: 04SCTLS

McCain-Gustav '08

http://www.slate.com/id/2198984/

The hurricane upsets the GOP Convention but may be good for the GOP.
By John Dickerson
Posted Sunday, Aug. 31, 2008, at 9:18 PM ET

Gustav is now the third name on John McCain's ticket. Depending on how McCain responds, he may actually benefit from its presence—and those in the hurricane's path could also benefit from the politicization of the response.
As the hurricane bears down on the Gulf Coast, McCain has been thrust into a quasi-presidential role of reacting to the weather on the public stage. He has all but halted the convention. The first day will be limited to just parliamentary activities. Tuesday is also probably shot. His campaign has chartered a plane to send worried delegates back home. The vast roster of fundraisers in town has been put to work raising money for the relief effort. The party atmosphere has been redirected. The Distilled Spirits Council, aka the booze lobby, has turned its Monday party into a fundraiser for the Red Cross.
Almost exactly three years to the day that President Bush created a new standard for botching the political response to a natural disaster, McCain is not going to repeat Bush's mistake. On Sunday, he flew with Sarah Palin to Mississippi to survey preparations. When the GOP announced it was scaling back the convention, McCain kicked off the announcement by appearing by satellite. "I wanna thank all of my fellow Republicans as we take off our Republican hats and put on our American hats and we say 'America, we're with you. America, we're going to care for these people in their time of need' and we're gonna display it in every possible way as Americans always have and Americans always will."
For the moment, the disaster benefits McCain, because like all great political moments, it allows him to act authentically and yet benefit politically. One of the worst political clichés actually is true at this moment: Good policy is good politics. All McCain has to do is keep his aides off the phones talking about the politics of the storm, and he'll be in a position to benefit from it. (And so far, he looks like he's done that, too.)
The theme of McCain's campaign was already going to be that he puts the country first while Barack Obama puts himself first. The second phrase will drop, but McCain gets a chance to underscore the first half by turning his convention into a national moment of service. "A call to service for all," as his Web site puts it. (Obama has a Web site, too).
By taking bold public steps, he also burnishes his credentials as a crisis manager and distances himself from Bush. McCain has often criticized Bush for not calling the nation to action after Sept. 11. Now he can show how he would be different rather than just tell us about it. (That Bush and Cheney had to cancel their Monday night appearances at the convention is also good news for McCain.)
Before the storm, convention delegates were buzzing with delight about the Palin pick. "There's just a zing in everyone's step," one delegate told me before exiting our hotel elevator. Republican women are thrilled to have one of their own. One gun enthusiast gushed about having a fellow "stompin' momma" on the ticket. Evangelicals are delighted not only because Palin is a woman of faith, but because by choosing Palin, McCain has sent a signal about how much he cares about that part of his party. Delegates can continue to celebrate the pick without seeming overtly political—and Palin gets a little room to practice for her new role.
The Obama campaign, meanwhile, has toned down its rhetoric, and the DNC has shuttered its "More of the Same" opposition office in St. Paul at least for a day. Don Fowler, the South Carolina Democratic Party chairman didn't get the memo and stupidly joked that the hurricane was God's favor to Democrats . (There has been a small mini-trend in weather-related stupidity this election cycle. Before Fowler, the boobery prize belonged to the Focus on the Family commentator who had mused about praying for rain on Obama's speech in Denver.)
When and if the GOP Convention gets under way, it will be all about service and sacrifice—which are easy themes for Republicans to speechify about and hard for the Democrats to knock directly. If Democrats continue their current strategy and attack McCain and Palin for offering nothing new, they'll run the risk of seeming too political before the national pause on politics is over. Or they'll look like they're not sufficiently committed to such all-American virtues like service and national brotherhood.
It may seem crass to talk about the politics of this event, but in the post Katrina world, no natural disaster can be divorced from its political implications. No one wants to admit this. But both campaigns are acting politically if for no other reason than to appear as though they're not acting politically. At any rate, it may just be possible that politics is helpful in a situation like this: The political impulse for both McCain and Obama is to do as much as they can to help those affected.
If you've read this far and still feel ambivalent about thinking about the politics of an event in which many people are already being displaced and suffering, then allow me to make a practical suggestion for putting politics here to good use here. Both candidates have boasted about their talents for bipartisanship. Both have also paid for ad time all over the country for advertisements (in some cases, attack ads) that are scheduled to air over the next few days.
So here's my idea: McCain and Obama should create a joint ad calling for donations and prayers to those affected by Gustav, and run those in place of the ads already scheduled. After all, attack ads—and attack ads in response to attack ads—make it onto the air in matter of hours. So there's no doubt the McCain and Obama campaigns could do this if they wanted to. If you think they should, call them: Obama's at (866) 675-2008, McCain's at (703) 418-2008. No one is practicing politics right now, so they should be able to respond to your call.

Posted by: 04SCTLS

Buzz Kill

How the Democrats are responding

http://slate.com/blogs/blogs/trailhe...buzz-kill.aspx

Hurricane Gustav is more than 1,000 miles from St. Paul, but its impact on the Republican Convention has already been substantial: canceled speeches, parties (they’re now charity fundraisers), and appearances. Equally flustered are mischief-making Democrats in St. Paul.
Buzz Kill for the Democrats

The Dems had planned a whole week of counterprogramming right across the street from the Xcel Center in St. Paul. They plastered billboards across the city featuring the famous McCain-Bush hug. Their war room, the “More of the Same Media Center,” was going to hold daily briefings for reporters (“with breakfast!”). They were even passing out flash drives with up-to-the-minute agitprop, which they called “St. Paul Survival Kits.”
Needless to say, survival kits aren’t quite as funny now.
Even before the Republicans decided to cancel all of Monday’s events save the most technical proceedings, the Democrats started dismantling. Sunday’s afternoon reception was canceled, as was Monday’s morning briefing. The MOTSMC is in hibernation until further notice. “Our thoughts and prayers are with the families in the region,” wrote DNC spokesman Damien LaVera in a statement.
If Republicans are in a tough spot, then Democrats’ position is even more difficult. The GOP doesn’t want to look insensitive by ignoring the hurricane, nor does it want to appear to be exploiting a tragedy. The Dems, meanwhile, don’t want to be seen as accusing the Republicans of exploiting a tragedy for political purposes—because that’s exploitation, too. In other words, if the Democrats attack, neither party comes out looking good. It’s kamikaze or nothing.
So instead, it’s become a contest to do the most good. Republicans are urging RNC party-throwers to collect money for charity. Obama has promised to use his list of millions to mobilize donors and volunteers. He also declined to hit McCain for his intended visit to New Orleans. “I think for John to want to find out what's going on is fine,” he said. If only there had been a presidential race going on in August 2005.
Of course, peace can’t reign forever. McCain campaign manager Rick Davis emphasized that as of now, they’re canceling events only through 5:30 p.m. Monday. The Dems have likewise kept their options open past Monday morning. But it’s up to the Republicans to make the first slip. Today’s press conference was a masterwork in tact—McCain made a passionate appeal, while Davis exuded calm. But the Democrats are no doubt operating with a hair trigger. The first whiff of exploitation or insensitivity or managerial incompetence, and the snipers across the street will snap back into action.
Then again, if the Republicans manage to turn this from a distraction into a redemption story, the Democrats may need all the survival kits they can get.
Published Sunday, August 31, 2008 8:52 PM by Christopher Beam
_______________________________________________

It looks like McCain has become the "fortunate" One, turning the tables on Obama, taking the limelight away and showing what a real president acts like.

Posted by: Maxb49

"It looks like McCain has become the "fortunate" One, turning the tables on Obama, taking the limelight away and showing what a real president acts like."

Yeah, a real president exploits the "fortunes" (your word, not mine) of a national tragedy. McCain's an sob.

Posted by: Calabrio

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

"It looks like McCain has become the "fortunate" One, turning the tables on Obama, taking the limelight away and showing what a real president acts like."

Yeah, a real president exploits the "fortunes" (your word, not mine) of a national tragedy. McCain's an sob.

What is McCain "exploiting?"
He's responding to what could be a disaster in a responsible way.

If it's handled well, then it reflects well upon him, as it should. If he doesn't, then it reflects poorly on him. In the meantime, he's going to lose two or three days of media time that would be showcasing him, telling his noble story, and injecting energy into the campaign.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Calabrio

Yeah whatever

That batchit old dumb cluck didn't give a damn about Hurricane Katrina victims and wants us to believe he really cares about Gustav.

McCain can rot.

Posted by: 04SCTLS

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Yeah, a real president exploits the "fortunes" (your word, not mine) of a national tragedy. McCain's an sob.

By "fortunate" I mean the hurricaine has timed itself such that he looks good toning down the first few days of the convention in response.
It plays well with his "Country First" slogan.
Obama would do the same thing in McCain's place but it seems Obama's luck has started to run out since McCain's VP announcement blew him off the front pages and crushed his post convention glow.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Yeah whatever

That batchit old dumb cluck didn't give a damn about Hurricane Katrina victims and wants us to believe he really cares about Gustav.

McCain can rot.

Hey, great comeback!

You ever think about teaching debate?

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Hey, great comeback!

You ever think about teaching debate?

The best comeback occurs Election Night when your candidate loses.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by 04SCTLS

Sorry, McCain's VP announcement hasn't put McCain ahead in the polls.

Posted by: 04SCTLS

Democrats are always higher in the polls till after labor day when the real campaigning starts.
Then their loser heritage takes over as they slide and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Lets see how Obama does without his teleprompter.
The debates will really tell the difference between the candidates.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Sorry, McCain's VP announcement hasn't put McCain ahead in the polls.

Zogby: McCain/Palin at 47%, compared to 45% support for Obama/Biden

It seems ignorance is bliss, eh?

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Zogby: McCain/Palin at 47%, compared to 45% support for Obama/Biden

It seems ignorance is bliss, eh?

Wrong, sport. That poll is already old, having concluded on August 30th.

Looking at trial heats concluded on August 31st, we see that Obama is still in the lead:

http://pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

Tracking polls ending on Monday, September 1st (today) have Obama at 47% and put him up to 49% when you include leaners.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

But if you want to go by ollllllllld polls you go ahead and do that.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by 04SCTLS

Democrats are always higher in the polls till after labor day when the real campaigning starts.
Then their loser heritage takes over as they slide and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
Lets see how Obama does without his teleprompter.
The debates will really tell the difference between the candidates.

John McCain is going to have a hard time in a real debate forum against an attorney (read: professional debater), where the questions aren't written through the rose colored glasses of a religious fanatic.

Ah, the real campaigning started today? You mean on the same time that John McCain cancelled the opening to his convention?

On the day that Ms. Anticorruption had to hire an attorney because she herself is under an ethics investigation?

Does anyone know how long the flight to Alaska takes?

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Tracking polls ending on Monday, September 1st (today) have Obama at 47% and put him up to 49% when you include leaners.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

Max,

Just an FYI, Rasmussen is the end-all-be-all poll around these parts, unless it shows poorly for the Reps/Con, then it's bias liberal agenda.

Posted by: 04SCTLS

Palin has a few days to present herself on the national stage and how well she does will set the tone for the rest of the election.
Until then the polls are meaningless.
Just because Obama is a lawyer doesn't mean he's a good debater.
He does very well with a script and a teleprompter but not so well when he has to be spontaneous.
The story just gets more fascinating with this historic election as we start down to the finish.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

Max,

Just an FYI, Rasmussen is the end-all-be-all poll around these parts, unless it shows poorly for the Reps/Con, then it's bias liberal agenda.

LOL

You know I really think that there were plenty of credible choices John McCain could have made selecting a running mate. I might not have agreed with their policy positions, but there are Republicans with - at the very least - credible backgrounds. At least Giuliani and Romney had their law doctorates. This woman has a bachelors degree in...communications. Even Bush has an MBA. In this day an age a bachelor's degree is an unacceptable educational background to lead a country. She's the governor of Alaska for Christ's sake, a state with fewer inhabitants than the metropolitan region of my home town (Buffalo, New York) and already under investigation for violations of ethical canons. The icing on the cake comes in that Palin is a self described creationist, a fanatical religious position holding that the Earth was created in it's present form in the year 4,004 B.C. A person doesn't get more out of touch with reality than that.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by 04SCTLS

Palin has a few days to present herself on the national stage and how well she does will set the tone for the rest of the election.
Until then the polls are meaningless.

Polls never mean anything when it's your candidate that's down. It sure as hell meant something to you when the old poll had McCain up, marginally, so quit bull*****ing me.

McCain could have put New York into play if he nominated Giuliani or, at the very least picked a credible candidate that voters in the swing states could take seriously. Instead, he picks an intellectual lightweight "hockey mom" (this is a frickin joke...I haven't laughed so hard in my life) who hasn't set foot the mainland United States since taking her seat at the Governor...OF ALASKA

a year or so back.

And you're telling me that senility hasn't set in on John McCain?!?! Oh my God!

You have a point though. She has a matter of several days to present herself to the American public and prove that she isn't a hypocrite on ethics, on family values; prove that she isn't a complete imbecile on science; and prove that she could lead this country in the event of John McCain's demise.

But it ain't going to happen. Most people in this country are unaffected by John McCain's choice. Roughly equal amounts of people have been moved to one side or the other by the pick. Most don't believe she's ready to lead. And now she's hired a lawyer which means, you guessed it, the s***'s hitting the fan in Alaska on the ethics investigation on her.

This country turned into exactly what George Carlin said it would turn into. Too bad he isn't alive to see it.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

You're seriously attacking Palin on her qualifications? I must remind you that she has more executive experience as our #2 than your #1 has. Furthermore, Delaware is about the same size as Alaska pop-wise, and Biden's not even running it. Obama's never run anything as big as a 7/11.

Case in point: Can you name your state senator without looking up his/her name?

I didn't think so.

That's how important Obama's experience is. Remember, he's been running for Prez since day 143 of his U.S. Senatorial career, which by the way wouldn't have had a chance of even being if Mike Ditka had decided to run. The man hasn't even been doing his current job as long as Palin's been doing hers.

In short, I feel more comfortable with our ticket than you should with yours.

Moreover, being under investigation has been the rite of passage for Democrat candidates for years. I would think this should qualify her in your book. Maybe if she had another lover who did a spread in Playgirl she'd have a better chance, eh?

Quote:

The best comeback occurs Election Night when your candidate loses.

Good luck with that. Without Ross Perot, you guys have a lot of work to do. Remember that Dukakis was up 20 points at this time in 1988.

Posted by: Maxb49

"Case in point: Can you name your state senator without looking up his/her name?"

Bill Stachowski. I've been involved in politics in my area for 30 years. Originally ran against him as a Republican. Try again next time.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

You're seriously attacking Palin on her qualifications? I must remind you that she has more executive experience as our #2 than your #1 has.

In short, I feel more comfortable with our ticket than you should with yours.

Moreover, being under investigation has been the rite of passage for Democrat candidates for years. I would think this should qualify her in your book. Maybe if she had another lover who did a spread in Playgirl she'd have a better chance, eh?

Good luck with that. Without Ross Perot, you guys have a lot of work to do. Remember that Dukakis was up 20 points at this time in 1988.

1. Your candidate is a loony lightweight who believes the Earth appeared out of nowhere in 4,004 B.C.

2. Your candidate holds nothing more than a bachelor's degree in communication and is educationally unqualified to deal with the many educated leaders in our nation and the world.

3. The only "executive experience" your candidate has is waking up at three am to deal with a moose stuck in a trash can. (Maher)

4. If you had the power you KNOW you would get her out of that ethics investigation. Don't even start with me on marital infidelity, that's something John McCain knows a lot about.

Your ticket is toast and deep down you know it.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

"Case in point: Can you name your state senator without looking up his/her name?"

Bill Stachowski. I've been involved in politics in my area for 30 years. Originally ran against him as a Republican. Try again next time.

Try again yourself.

Your boy is a nobody, a creation of the media. He has no executive experience. Even Hillary says McCain is more qualified to be President.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Your ticket is toast and deep down you know it.

#1: Using terms like "loony lightweight" marginalizes you as a name caller and a troll. If you want to discuss the differences in qualifications, Calabrio has already linked a comparison. But go ahead, cling to the "Bachelor's degree" and "creationist" canards. They won't hold water; even the media won't bother with them. By the way, which candidate are you attacking? McCain is running for president, in case you didn't know.

#2: And you're the self appointed arbiter who decides which degree makes you qualified? That's hilarious. Communication =/= dealing with educated leaders? Ok, that's even funnier.

Your point #3 is lame, and your source is a demagogue that nobody takes seriously. How about this one: Your candidate's executive experience consists of...uh...um...well...

#4: You're the one who started that. I was responding to it.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Try again yourself.

Your boy is a nobody, a creation of the media. He has no executive experience. Even Hillary says McCain is more qualified to be President.

Check the records yourself at the Erie County Board of Elections, 1980 canvass. Doofus.

Posted by: Maxb49

"But go ahead, cling to the "Bachelor's degree" and "creationist" canards. They won't hold water; even the media won't bother with them. "

Sarah Palin is a self described creationist. This is not up for debate and it has been reported by every major news network - CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc., etc. Palin also advocates the teaching of creationism in classes.

"#2: And you're the self appointed arbiter who decides which degree makes you qualified? That's hilarious. Communication =/= dealing with educated leaders? Ok, that's even funnier."

I've voted in every election since I became registered to vote while serving in the military in 1959. *I* decide who gets *MY* vote. You bet your ass I decide who's qualified and who isn't. The woman is an intellectual lightweight.

"Your point #3 is lame, and your source is a demagogue that nobody takes seriously. How about this one: Your candidate's executive experience consists of...uh...um...well..."

Dealing with polar bear issues isn't the kind of executive experience the presidential job entails. Citing "executive experience" for any side is a moot point. It is impossible to have the experience of being the Federal Executive without being the federal executive. Palin's only argument falls flat on it's face.

"#4: You're the one who started that. I was responding to it."

Cool. Nevertheless, ethics investigations hurt candidates. John McCain and Sarah Palin wish they could make that investigation go away. Your ticket ain't gonna have cash value at the window.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Sarah Palin is a self described creationist. This is not up for debate and it has been reported by every major news network - CNN, Fox, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, etc., etc. Palin also advocates the teaching of creationism in classes.

Good for her. She has some good sense. The fact that you make this an article of ridicule does not impress me.

Quote:

I've voted in every election since I became registered to vote while serving in the military in 1959. *I* decide who gets *MY* vote. You bet your ass I decide who's qualified and who isn't. The woman is an intellectual lightweight.

How does voting in every election qualify you to judge someone's qualifications? Heck, two bit crack whores can cast ballots. Ho hum, I don't give a crap if you cast a ballot for Thomas Freaking Jefferson - your arguments (which are nonexistent) are not convincing.

Quote:

Dealing with polar bear issues isn't the kind of executive experience the presidential job entails. Citing "executive experience" for any side is a moot point. It is impossible to have the experience of being the Federal Executive without being the federal executive. Palin's only argument falls flat on it's face.

By your very standard, Obama can in no way be qualified.

Quote:

Cool. Nevertheless, ethics investigations hurt candidates. John McCain and Sarah Palin wish they could make that investigation go away. Your ticket ain't gonna have cash value at the window.

I'll take Troopergate (which has already been debunked thoroughly) over Rezko and Ayers.

If you are interested in being intellectually honest about each candidate's flaws and strengths, then we can have a conversation. If you're trying to convince me to change my vote, you're FAILING epically. If you're just trying to argue for the sake of it, you're BORING me epically. Hurling talking points and insults won't get it, sport. As you can see, I've been around a bit myself.

Posted by: Maxb49

[quote=fossten;419378]Good for her. She has some good sense. The fact that you make this an article of ridicule does not impress me.

Yeah sure. She believes the Earth is six thousand years old, a position flying directly in the face of every geological discovery in history. You call that good sense? Get real.

How does voting in every election qualify you to judge someone's qualifications? Heck, two bit crack whores can cast ballots. Ho hum, I don't give a crap if you cast a ballot for Thomas Freaking Jefferson - your arguments (which are nonexistent) are not convincing.

It's hard to convince anyone who believes Palin has "good sense" believing in the co-existence of humans and dinosaurs of anything remotely resembling logic.

By your very standard, Obama can in no way be qualified.

Dunno what standard you're talking about, please reiterate

I'll take Troopergate (which has already been debunked thoroughly)

Nothing has been debunked. She has hired an attorney. Ms. Palin seems to be in hot water.

Posted by: fossten

Since I'm an angry white coward, I'm done talking with you.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

The point is, Obama should have had momentum coming out of the convention, and McCain's choice of Palin and the timing of the announcement have nullified that momentum.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

How is she a potential "hypocrite on ethics [and] family values", and why does that matter? How is she a potential "complete imbecile on science"?

It seems you are purposely assuming the worst about her unless and until proven otherwise. Can you say shifting the burden of proof?

Quote:

Most people in this country are unaffected by John McCain's choice. Roughly equal amounts of people have been moved to one side or the other by the pick. Most don't believe she's ready to lead.

And your basing this absurd conclusion on what? Nothing more then wishful thinking and denial on your part, I imagine...

Everything I have seen indicates that in fact McCain has stolen Obama's thunder coming out of the convention and nullified any momentum he has had in the polls.

Posted by: fossten

Total convention bounce for Obama (per the Gallup poll): THREE POINTS.

Expected bounce was FIFTEEN POINTS.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Total convention bounce for Obama (per the Gallup poll): THREE POINTS.

Expected bounce was FIFTEEN POINTS.

Nevertheless, he's still ahead. McCain's still behind. And you wish differently. Wishing won't get you there.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

1. Your candidate is a loony lightweight who believes the Earth appeared out of nowhere in 4,004 B.C.

see appeal to Ridicule and straw man fallacy...

Quote:

2. Your candidate holds nothing more than a bachelor's degree in communication and is educationally unqualified to deal with the many educated leaders in our nation and the world.

Ad hominem attack and, again, appeal to ridicule...

Care to make a reasonable and logical argument, instead of a fallacious one?

Also, Lincoln only had 18 months of formal eduation, yet is considered one of the wisest president's we ever had. I dare you to prove that a higher level of education equals wisdom, which is arguably the most important intellectual quality in a potential president.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Nevertheless, he's still ahead. McCain's still behind. And you wish differently. Wishing won't get you there.

Not really. Statistically, they are even. The lead is within the margin of error in the vast majority of those polls...

You are the one trying to draw more from the facts then is waranted. Who is the one working mostly on wishful thinking?

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

The point is, Obama should have had momentum coming out of the convention, and McCain's choice of Palin and the timing of the announcement have nullified that momentum.

Obama is leading in the polls as of today. I'm sure this is going to go up and down until election day. I think he (Obama) will win this election.

That being said, McCain's choice of Palin didn't really do much for him. Republicans were going to vote for him anyway, and this choice didn't put him ahead of Obama. Look what happened at the convention, the Republican convention. They canceled part of it thinking that John McCain would get publicity being down near the hurricane. Instead of the McCain campaign being covered at the storm, three issues were covered for most of the day: Palin's daughter, Palin's hiring of an attorney to defend her in the ethics investigation, and coverage of the actual weather. It's not looking too good for Palin today and only time will tell how she fared the day in the eye of public opinion. Nevertheless, McCain got nothing of what he wanted and more than what he bargained for.

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

When you count the leaners, Obama is now at 50% leading outside the margin for error.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

Obama is ahead of McCain. For now at least.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Quote:

A lack of a degree hardly means you are an "intellecual lightweight" and having a post-grade degree (or more) hardly means you are an intellecual "heavyweight". That is a huge non sequiter.

Again, remember Ab Lincoln.

"Your point #3 is lame, and your source is a demagogue that nobody takes seriously. How about this one: Your candidate's executive experience consists of...uh...um...well..."

Quote:

Now you are attempting to move the goalposts!

Having some executive experience is much better then none and a stronger qualification then having none. Whether or not that experience is at the federal level or not is beside the point, and you know it.

If we run with your demand that someone have federal executive experience to run for president, then the only people elegible are presidents and former presidents. Maybe we should re-elect Bush again, eh?

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

When you count the leaners, Obama is now at 50% leading outside the margin for error.

http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm

Obama is ahead of McCain. For now at least.

"when you count leaners"... so when the poll is made irrelevant, Obama is ahead...

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

"when you count leaners"... so when the poll is made irrelevant, Obama is ahead...

Actually, I made a mistake. The last poll didn't include leaners. It was a trial heat with Obama at 50. My mistake.

If you get a chance, read "the myth of the independent voter", and you'll see why political scientists count leaners towards either party as a pretty solid guarantee. If I can dig up the article I'll post it here.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

BINGO!

Bush/Palin '08!

Posted by: Maxb49

Couple of points for the evening

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Care to provide links? I am pretty sure you are misrepresenting that info. She may consider herself a creationist, but is she is advocating teaching creationism in the classroom, that would be the first I have heard of anyone advocating that.

More likely she is advocating the presenting of the alternative scientific theory of intellegent design in the classroom. And yes, there is a difference as has been thuroughly discussed on this board in other thread.

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2...s-vp-want.html
She said she'd want to see both evolution and creationism taught at schools. Creationism is a religious position. The key here is totality of the circumstances. She is a member of an extremist Pentecostal church. She is a self described creationist. She openly answered a question of creationism saying she wants it taught in the classroom.

A lack of a degree hardly means you are an "intellecual lightweight" and having a post-grade degree (or more) hardly means you are an intellecual "heavyweight". That is a huge non sequiter.

Again, totality of the circumstances. Limited education, party line issue positions, never did anything of academic or otherwise innovative interest, participates in a radical fundamentalist church that speaks in tongues and handles snakes. The whole picture of Palin is a just a party head with no substance, no advanced education, no grasp of scientific facts, and a religious fanatic.

If we run with your demand that someone have federal executive experience to run for president, then the only people elegible are presidents and former presidents. Maybe we should re-elect Bush again, eh?

The point I don't think the issue of "executive experience" matters in a presidential election, period. I don't think Palin has the background or the character to lead this country if need be, that's the point. Running a state outside of the mainland United States with a population smaller than my county doesn't impress me. Sorry.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

The point I don't think the issue of "executive experience" matters in a presidential election, period.

Nope, you don't dare think that, because otherwise Obama and Joe would be out the door.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

She said she'd want to see both evolution and creationism taught at schools. Creationism is a religious position. The key here is totality of the circumstances. She is a member of an extremist Pentecostal church. She is a self described creationist. She openly answered a question of creationism saying she wants it taught in the classroom.

The latest courtroom defeat came in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case, when the superficially religion-neutral theory of intelligent design was classified as religious creationism.

It seems that the working definition of creationism for the article was one that is so broad as to encompass ID as well; which is a mischaracterization.

There has been no movement in recent years to teach "creationism" in the classroom, but instead to include ID in the curriculum. the MSM has mischaracterized ID as creationism. It seems that is what is most likely going on here as well...

Why would she be asked in a debate about creationism and evolution when the debate is between ID and evolution?

Posted by: Maxb49

Quote:

Originally Posted by shagdrum

Actually, according to the article, all she said was, "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of education. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."

As to weather the "both" she was talking about was actually evolution and creationism that is exceedingly unclear.

She was questioned about creationism. She said what she said, it's on the record.

Most of the mainstream scientific community refuses to distinguish between ID and creationism; often mischaracterizing ID as creationism.

Strictly speaking, there are differences between ID and strict creation. She was addressing the question of creationism. Are you telling me this member of the extremist Pentecostal church can't tell the difference? Shame on her.

The only talk at all of creationism here is from the article itself, not from any quotes of her's. It is most likely that the question she was responding to was about ID and evolution. Why else would the article follow up her quote with the point that...

The latest courtroom defeat came in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover case, when the superficially religion-neutral theory of intelligent design was classified as religious creationism.

She answered the question on creationism. Fox news reported she is a self described creationist. She is a member of the Pentecostal church, a well known fundamentalist sect with a belief in creationism. Those are the facts.

Posted by: shagdrum

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

You have yet to provide any proof that she was questioned about teaching creationism in school. Simply assertions made by you and effective equivocation on the blog you posted. Care to find a transcript of the actual question she was responding to, instead of some bias article paraphrasing (and mischaracterizing) the question being asked of her?

If it is truly "on the record" then show that record. Because all the info you have shown suggests a confusion between creationism and ID. There is no movement to teach creationism in schools in this country, but there is a movement to allow for the teaching of ID. Why would she be asked about creationism being taught in schools instead of ID?

Posted by: Calabrio

John Kerry had a six point lead coming out of the DNC convention in 2004.
It was a 50/44 race.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2004Aug2.html

Posted by: fossten

A few points:

1. Max is now on record citing Fox News as a credible source.

2. Max - Many of us on this forum not only accept creationism as well-supported by science (as does fully two-thirds of the country), but some of us have actually done the research. We're not going to turn this into another evolution/creation thread, but understand this - ridiculing Palin for her creationist beliefs is not going to score any points with most people here. In fact, you're more likely to alienate mainstreamers with your nasty rhetoric.

3. Shag - I applaud your yeoman-like effort to distinguish ID from Creationism, but who are you kidding. I'd rather ID'ers quit nibbling around the edges and playing the P.C. game and just take the bull by the horns and call it what it is. Evos can mock creationism all they want, I don't care. I'm satisfied with the level of research I and others have done, and I find no holes in it. Maybe I won't convince the most hardened believers, but then half the country (including teh Oprah) believes Obama is the Messiah, too, so take that for what it's worth.

Posted by: Machspeed

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

I will assume from your comments here that you lost in your run against Stachowski, if in fact, this is true. Regardless, in reading through your comments here, things become perfectly clear.

Posted by: fossten

Anderson Cooper interviewed Obama about his lack of experience last night:

Quote:

AC: Some Republican critics say, you don’t have the experience to handle a situation like this [Hurricane Gustav]. They’ve in fact said that Governor Palin has more executive experience as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state like Alaska. What’s your response?

BO: Well, you know, my understanding is that, uh, Governor Palin’s town of Wasilly [sic] has, uh, 50 employees, uh, uh, we’ve got 2500, uh, in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. Uh, uh, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month. Uh, so I think that, uh, our ability to manage large systems, uh, and to, uh, execute, uh, I think has been made clear over the last couple of years. Uh, and certainly, in terms of, uh, the legislation that I’ve passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina, uh, of how we handle emergency management. The fact that, uh, many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place, uh, as we speak indicates to extent to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.

So basically he has executive experience due to his experience campaigning.

No wonder he smiled when he said it.

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Palin's hiring of an attorney to defend her in the ethics investigation

Once again, fact checking has shown you are in error.

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5702697

Quote:

Palin, who has denied any wrongdoing and has said she has nothing to hide, hired private lawyers on Saturday, the day after Sen. McCain announced her as his running mate.

"Until then, the Governor used state lawyers and everything was fine," said Sen. French.

"That's wrong," said a spokesperson for the McCain campaign, Brian Rogers.

"The attorney was hired by the state Department of Law weeks ago, as part of the official duty to defend the governor," said Roger, and "obviously had nothing to do with either the McCain campaign."

Posted by: cammerfe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxb49

Maxie, I note with interest your chest-pounding regarding your education. If I'd carried-on as you have, I'd be more careful about the spelling and word use in your posts.

In your post above, (cut off so it doesn't show here)---

Weather usually includes sunshine and rain and so on.

Whether, while somewhat archaic, suggests alternatives.

I believe you meant whether. Educated people don't make such mistakes. You make yourself out to be an illiterate by such a silly error.

As I observed in another thread, Pentecostal is a generic term. Your use of it as if it were specific suggests rather profound ignorance.

This is a tough forum. Enter at your peril.

KS

Posted by: Calabrio

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

So basically he has executive experience due to his experience campaigning.

No wonder he smiled when he said it.

Besides the outrageous claim that running a political campaign constitutes "executive experience," he made sure to compare the numbers to her Mayoral position, conveniently failing to compare the numbers to her current job, as GOVERNOR of the state of Alaska.

Actually, Glenn Beck addressed this point beautifully tonight:

Quote:

BECK: Did he miss that she`s the governor now? Why would Barack Obama compare his current job with her former job? Why not compare apples to apples?

Maybe this is why. We crunched the numbers. Sorry. And since he announced his candidacy, Barack Obama has raised about $21 million a month. That`s a huge organization for sure, unless you directly compare it to Sarah Palin, who is handling revenues of 47 times as large, over a billion per month.

Barack Obama says 2,500 employees. That`s what he`s got working for him. And it is a lot. Unless you directly compare it to Sarah Palin and the Alaskan government with its over 77,000 employees or around 31 times as many as Barack.

So if, as Barack insinuates running an organization the size of his campaign is a sign you`re qualified to be president, Sarah Palin is somewhere between 37 -- or 31 and 47 times more qualified than him.

Posted by: fossten

Let's not ignore her approval rating - 80% - as contrasted with Obama's current approval rating - somewhere around 47-50%.