|
Post by rrm15 on Nov 3, 2008 1:16:37 GMT -5
I'm pretty moderate, and I voted for Obama in a "lesser of two evils" kinda thing. I like Mccain, but when he picked Palin as VP and after his performance in the debates, the decision became a little easier for me.
Really, I don't like either candidate that much, but Obamas plan for the economy and health care made me side with him just a little more.
I really wish Guilliani had gotten the Republican nomination though.
|
|
|
Post by KStrick on Nov 3, 2008 1:16:55 GMT -5
Almost bankrupt. Good try, though... Because we keep lowering taxes. Hell, that's why so many government programs fail, because the people who use them never want to fit the bill. Either they're too poor or too selfish. And while I won't come out and advocate the usage of drugs, I believe a person should have the right to consume them, and if they abuse them, they should recieve help. ...exactly my point on universal health care... it WILL come to that soon. Taxes are bad. I hated that bailout so freaking much. American people could have done so much more with it than the government, or the corporations who squandered it on "executive hunting trips" and "spa resort meetings" ever could have.... all while helping our economy tenfold.
|
|
EAT IT
Bubba Ho-Tep
Way Up In There
Posts: 627
|
Post by EAT IT on Nov 3, 2008 1:25:01 GMT -5
I'm voting for Obama, because he is the only logical and rational choice for me and those who think like me.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 13,993
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Nov 3, 2008 1:27:45 GMT -5
Exactly. I switched from Democrat to Republican specifically for him, and gave the Republicans one bite at the apple. When they failed, I hoped Michael Bloomberg would enter the race. When he didn't, I hoped for Jesse Ventura, until I found that he was a 9/11 revisionist. On the Democrat side, I was hoping for Bill Richardson, but would be happy with anyone who wasn't Hillary. I began examining the Libertarians and settled on Wayne Root. I was glad that he at least got the VP nod, and hope he will be in control of the party by 2012.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Servo on Nov 3, 2008 1:32:31 GMT -5
Voted for Obama.
Go to Youtube and watch Triumph the Insult Comic Dog interviewing Nader, t's more scary/sad than funny (he seems to have thought Triumph was a real dog).
Ok, I jsut want to say I found some hypocricy from the Republicans. They focus on Obama's lack of experience, but put someone with less in the position to be a heart beat away from the seat.
Claims of sexism towards Palin, yet they said the same things about Hillary.
Have a PM request, the ad from the Republican Election Committee talking about Obama's connection with Rev White. Is the picture at teh end photoshoped?
|
|
|
Post by hawkfan44 on Nov 3, 2008 1:52:32 GMT -5
heres something else i'd like to get some opinion on (and if you'd rather PM me your opinion as opposed to laying it all out here so as to avoid any confrontation and losing this thread then go for it. i'll be on probably all night.) SNL. What kind of effect do you think it has on the public's opinion of a canidate? With the way Tina Fey and SNL has ripped Palin/McCain to shreds and then both the potential President and VP appear on the same show, does it make them look like they're able to laugh at themselves or does it make them look like desperate fools who will take whatever they can get in order to recieve some publicity? Just something I've wondered for a while now. to answer your SNL question there, its a mix of both. without question, McCain was able to have fun and poke fun at his campaign in that QVC skit with Tina Fey. then again at the same time it was a last ditch publicity stunt with time running out before the election
|
|
Strotha
Hank Scorpio
In heaven, everything is fine
Posts: 6,384
|
Post by Strotha on Nov 3, 2008 1:54:19 GMT -5
I'm voting for Obama.McCain and Palin scare the shit out of me.
|
|
|
Post by KStrick on Nov 3, 2008 1:56:33 GMT -5
Voted for Obama. Go to Youtube and watch Triumph the Insult Comic Dog interviewing Nader, t's more scary/sad than funny (he seems to have thought Triumph was a real dog). Ok, I jsut want to say I found some hypocricy from the Republicans. They focus on Obama's lack of experience, but put someone with less in the position to be a heart beat away from the seat. Claims of sexism towards Palin, yet they said the same things about Hillary. Have a PM request, the ad from the Republican Election Committee talking about Obama's connection with Rev White. Is the picture at teh end photoshoped? Obama was a Senator for 767 days (when he announced his candidacy for President) Sarah Palin was in office 635 days. 130 days (less than a year, even) is enough to be fully qualified? As far as Revenue (as establish by Obama stating her mayoral job in Alaska only having 15 employees and 3 million anually). Obama was handling 21 million monthly, with 2,500 employees Sarah Palin, as much as 1.025 billion a month with 77,000 employees below her. Alaska is a HUGE state for revenue. Illinois? Not so much... Palin owns a fishing industry, has 5 kids (1 with downs), visited Kuwait (Obama never has), Iraq (before Obama), sold the state jet, while flying her own (to save revenue for the state, putting that money into their infastructure), actually fought AGAINST her own party on a few occasions (and won, btw)... Does she have her problems? Of course. She's a politician. She's probably as sneaky as the guys. But saying she's unqualified while Obama is qualified to run the freaking country... I'm a little less supportive of that idea... Also, Obama's net worth between 2001 and 2004 was at 1,218,632, while giving less than 1% to charity, about .94%, as opposed to other people in his category, who donate about 2.7% of their revenue to charitable causes. He's never had any experience leading troops (Palin was in charge of the Alaskan National Guard), and is expected to lead us in Iraq? As a troop, that scares me... And, yes, the Republican party is just as guilty of saying a woman is "less qualified". However, most of the attacks WERE against her position, ideals (being WAY far left, though not as bad as Obama), not her sex. All I've seen against Palin is dedicated to her being a woman, or "unqualified". That's just to put it into perspective...
|
|
|
Post by drjayphd (feat. Pitbull) on Nov 3, 2008 2:06:16 GMT -5
I'm just amused, personally, that the big push in CT for Question 1 (the constitutionally-mandated constitutional convention) really only started once the superior court here legalized gay marriage... and yet the convention's proponents only speak in the vaguest of terms. Probably because they know an out-and-out ban on gay marriage wouldn't fly in CT.
Sadly, though, I'm woefully underinformed on the local races, although I did just sack someone on Facebook for calling Obama "America's terrorist" in his status. Direct quote when I asked him about that: "Because he's a piece of shit dumbass that doesn't know dick about America if he wants to run it like China." Oh, ignorance, will you ever cease to amaze?
(EDITOR'S NOTE: This guy isn't on the board to defend himself, but regardless, his opinion isn't mine. If you do share his opinion, I'm not bashing you. Just making a comment that this election seems to have brought out the worst in a lot of people, in both the Obama and McCain camps.)
|
|
|
Post by pazfan on Nov 3, 2008 2:06:37 GMT -5
Voted for Obama. Go to Youtube and watch Triumph the Insult Comic Dog interviewing Nader, t's more scary/sad than funny (he seems to have thought Triumph was a real dog). Ok, I jsut want to say I found some hypocricy from the Republicans. They focus on Obama's lack of experience, but put someone with less in the position to be a heart beat away from the seat. Claims of sexism towards Palin, yet they said the same things about Hillary. Have a PM request, the ad from the Republican Election Committee talking about Obama's connection with Rev White. Is the picture at teh end photoshoped? Obama was a Senator for 767 days (when he announced his candidacy for President) Sarah Palin was in office 635 days. 130 days (less than a year, even) is enough to be fully qualified? As far as Revenue (as establish by Obama stating her mayoral job in Alaska only having 15 employees and 3 million anually). Obama was handling 21 million monthly, with 2,500 employees Sarah Palin, as much as 1.025 billion a month with 77,000 employees below her. Alaska is a HUGE state for revenue. Illinois? Not so much... Palin owns a fishing industry, has 5 kids (1 with downs), visited Kuwait (Obama never has), Iraq (before Obama), sold the state jet, while flying her own (to save revenue for the state, putting that money into their infastructure), actually fought AGAINST her own party on a few occasions (and won, btw)... Does she have her problems? Of course. She's a politician. She's probably as sneaky as the guys. But saying she's unqualified while Obama is qualified to run the freaking country... I'm a little less supportive of that idea... Also, Obama's net worth between 2001 and 2004 was at 1,218,632, while giving less than 1% to charity, about .94%, as opposed to other people in his category, who donate about 2.7% of their revenue to charitable causes. He's never had any experience leading troops (Palin was in charge of the Alaskan National Guard), and is expected to lead us in Iraq? As a troop, that scares me... And, yes, the Republican party is just as guilty of saying a woman is "less qualified". However, most of the attacks WERE against her position, ideals (being WAY far left, though not as bad as Obama), not her sex. All I've seen against Palin is dedicated to her being a woman, or "unqualified". That's just to put it into perspective... i think a point he was trying to make was that a huge part of the mccain/palin campaign was based around obama's inexperience. then mccain chose someone just as (in)experienced as they claim obama is. kinda defeats the purpose.
|
|
|
Post by KStrick on Nov 3, 2008 2:11:43 GMT -5
Obama was a Senator for 767 days (when he announced his candidacy for President) Sarah Palin was in office 635 days. 130 days (less than a year, even) is enough to be fully qualified? As far as Revenue (as establish by Obama stating her mayoral job in Alaska only having 15 employees and 3 million anually). Obama was handling 21 million monthly, with 2,500 employees Sarah Palin, as much as 1.025 billion a month with 77,000 employees below her. Alaska is a HUGE state for revenue. Illinois? Not so much... Palin owns a fishing industry, has 5 kids (1 with downs), visited Kuwait (Obama never has), Iraq (before Obama), sold the state jet, while flying her own (to save revenue for the state, putting that money into their infastructure), actually fought AGAINST her own party on a few occasions (and won, btw)... Does she have her problems? Of course. She's a politician. She's probably as sneaky as the guys. But saying she's unqualified while Obama is qualified to run the freaking country... I'm a little less supportive of that idea... Also, Obama's net worth between 2001 and 2004 was at 1,218,632, while giving less than 1% to charity, about .94%, as opposed to other people in his category, who donate about 2.7% of their revenue to charitable causes. He's never had any experience leading troops (Palin was in charge of the Alaskan National Guard), and is expected to lead us in Iraq? As a troop, that scares me... And, yes, the Republican party is just as guilty of saying a woman is "less qualified". However, most of the attacks WERE against her position, ideals (being WAY far left, though not as bad as Obama), not her sex. All I've seen against Palin is dedicated to her being a woman, or "unqualified". That's just to put it into perspective... i think a point he was trying to make was that a huge part of the mccain/palin campaign was based around obama's inexperience. then mccain chose someone just as (in)experienced as they claim obama is. kinda defeats the purpose. Oh, absolutly. But it's also been a double edge sword for them. It fulfilled the whole "hey look, us Republicans have lady-types, too!", and got someone younger and, quite frankly, MILF'ier for the horny college demographic (is there really one?), however, it also opened them up to the same wrath they gave Hillary. Also, like Bush, having her appear "more approachable" in her conversations gave people the idea that she is stupid, which is far from the case. But her "inexperience" is also a huge counterpoint Pro-Bama-naughts use against Palin, even if they are pretty much both around the same timeframe as far as "administration skills" go. I don't know, but maybe Biden could say he was a POW himself to compete with McCain's "I'm a soldier" campaign, since politics IS nothing more than childish one-upsmanship. ... is there such thing as a horny male college demographic? I'm shocked that one isn't exploited more ![:-/](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/undecided.png)
|
|
|
Post by pazfan on Nov 3, 2008 2:17:31 GMT -5
i think a point he was trying to make was that a huge part of the mccain/palin campaign was based around obama's inexperience. then mccain chose someone just as (in)experienced as they claim obama is. kinda defeats the purpose. Oh, absolutly. But it's also been a double edge sword for them. It fulfilled the whole "hey look, us Republicans have lady-types, too!", and got someone younger and, quite frankly, MILF'ier for the horny college demographic (is there really one?), however, it also opened them up to the same wrath they gave Hillary. Also, like Bush, having her appear "more approachable" in her conversations gave people the idea that she is stupid, which is far from the case. But her "inexperience" is also a huge counterpoint Pro-Bama-naughts use against Palin, even if they are pretty much both around the same timeframe as far as "administration skills" go. I don't know, but maybe Biden could say he was a POW himself to compete with McCain's "I'm a soldier" campaign, since politics IS nothing more than childish one-upsmanship. ... is there such thing as a horny male college demographic? I'm shocked that one isn't exploited more ![:-/](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/undecided.png) what bothered me about mccain's choice of palin is that it just reeked of "dumb women will vote for mccain just because he's got a woman vp". at least, thats how it seemed to me. theres a better way of saying that... hmm. okay, it seemed to be a BLATANT strategic move as opposed to a decision that was made with the importance of that position in mind. barack obama has prooven to me that he would absolutely be able to run this country. in the unfortunate event that something were to happen to mccain, i honestly just don't have any faith in sarah palin. and if there is a horny male college demographic then when i run for president i'm choosing Heidi Klum as my running mate. lol
|
|
|
Post by KStrick on Nov 3, 2008 2:25:17 GMT -5
Oh, absolutly. But it's also been a double edge sword for them. It fulfilled the whole "hey look, us Republicans have lady-types, too!", and got someone younger and, quite frankly, MILF'ier for the horny college demographic (is there really one?), however, it also opened them up to the same wrath they gave Hillary. Also, like Bush, having her appear "more approachable" in her conversations gave people the idea that she is stupid, which is far from the case. But her "inexperience" is also a huge counterpoint Pro-Bama-naughts use against Palin, even if they are pretty much both around the same timeframe as far as "administration skills" go. I don't know, but maybe Biden could say he was a POW himself to compete with McCain's "I'm a soldier" campaign, since politics IS nothing more than childish one-upsmanship. ... is there such thing as a horny male college demographic? I'm shocked that one isn't exploited more ![:-/](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/undecided.png) what bothered me about mccain's choice of palin is that it just reeked of "dumb women will vote for mccain just because he's got a woman vp". at least, thats how it seemed to me. theres a better way of saying that... hmm. okay, it seemed to be a BLATANT strategic move as opposed to a decision that was made with the importance of that position in mind. barack obama has prooven to me that he would absolutely be able to run this country. in the unfortunate event that something were to happen to mccain, i honestly just don't have any faith in sarah palin. and if there is a horny male college demographic then when i run for president i'm choosing Heidi Klum as my running mate. lol Then I'd vote against ya, because I don't think she's attractive at all. ;D Any-dang-way, yeah, I even bought that arguement when it first came up. A million things had to happen in order to wind up with her, but I guess all the planets aligned, or something... But, they also KINDA needed to. I mean, come on, ANOTHER pro-Iraq war guy, former military, with another white-bread boring running mate no one cares about (I mean, look at Biden. The only time anyone cares what he says is when he has his "occasional blunders"... he's just ambiance at this point)... they needed something to break the monotany, especially with Obama running on the "hey look, I'm black... I'm not your traditional candidate" issue (well, not him all THAT much, but the Media SURE pushed that down everyone's throats... ). But honestly, with absolutely NO judgment against you (or, heck, ANY Obama supporter), what has he said/done that has made it so abundantly clear that he's the best candidate. I'm serious. So many people talk of him like he's a messiah, and we don't even know where he was truly born, his college records... the guy's history is under more lockdown than Fort Knox... and half of the people who have claimed their allegiance that I've talked to can't even give me one TRUE issue he has. It's the same with Kerry back in '04, I didn't even meet a single person who knew a platform he was running on other than "hey, at least I'm not Bush"... and it carried him quite well for no one knowing anything about him other than he was Frankenstein's monster's twin brother...
|
|
|
Post by Paul Servo on Nov 3, 2008 3:42:26 GMT -5
I have a question I wanted to ask a couple weeks ago
In the last debate, what was McCain doing at the end when he made that weird face? Did he know the camera was still on? And speaking of that debate, did he not learn from the 2000 election and Gore's eye rolls and audible sighs?
|
|
|
Post by Macho Dude Handy Damage on Nov 3, 2008 4:09:02 GMT -5
I'll be damned... I never thought I'd see the day this thread would be greenlit by the mods.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Todd Grisham on Nov 3, 2008 4:11:05 GMT -5
Sweet freedom!
Ahem.
Thanks for the chance here mods, hope we don't disappoint all of you.
I've been following closely, and I think I finally made my decision. I see no difference in their views on Iraq, both will be forced to remove troops within a two year time period. That issue is settled. I could live with the foreign policy of either of the two gentlemen. I fit more with McCain on social issues, and on economic issues. I've read Obama's tax plan, and it didn't exactly send a feeling up my leg.
I'm not on fire for McCain, but when I realized the Democrats could get a supermajority in the Senate, I'm afraid we could go through 2000-2006 all over again. We don't need a single party in power. Bad things happen! For that reason, I'm going to bite the bullet and go for McCain. Otherwise, my vote probably would have gone to Bob Barr.
But if Obama wins, we'll live. I have no problem with people who calmly consider the issues and choose their man, or woman. Obama is a worthy candidate. And if he wins, well, a lot of people have gushed over its historicity.
|
|
|
Post by pazfan on Nov 3, 2008 4:38:38 GMT -5
what bothered me about mccain's choice of palin is that it just reeked of "dumb women will vote for mccain just because he's got a woman vp". at least, thats how it seemed to me. theres a better way of saying that... hmm. okay, it seemed to be a BLATANT strategic move as opposed to a decision that was made with the importance of that position in mind. barack obama has prooven to me that he would absolutely be able to run this country. in the unfortunate event that something were to happen to mccain, i honestly just don't have any faith in sarah palin. and if there is a horny male college demographic then when i run for president i'm choosing Heidi Klum as my running mate. lol Then I'd vote against ya, because I don't think she's attractive at all. ;D Any-dang-way, yeah, I even bought that arguement when it first came up. A million things had to happen in order to wind up with her, but I guess all the planets aligned, or something... But, they also KINDA needed to. I mean, come on, ANOTHER pro-Iraq war guy, former military, with another white-bread boring running mate no one cares about (I mean, look at Biden. The only time anyone cares what he says is when he has his "occasional blunders"... he's just ambiance at this point)... they needed something to break the monotany, especially with Obama running on the "hey look, I'm black... I'm not your traditional candidate" issue (well, not him all THAT much, but the Media SURE pushed that down everyone's throats... ). But honestly, with absolutely NO judgment against you (or, heck, ANY Obama supporter), what has he said/done that has made it so abundantly clear that he's the best candidate. I'm serious. So many people talk of him like he's a messiah, and we don't even know where he was truly born, his college records... the guy's history is under more lockdown than Fort Knox... and half of the people who have claimed their allegiance that I've talked to can't even give me one TRUE issue he has. It's the same with Kerry back in '04, I didn't even meet a single person who knew a platform he was running on other than "hey, at least I'm not Bush"... and it carried him quite well for no one knowing anything about him other than he was Frankenstein's monster's twin brother... I can tell you several things he's said that makes me a fan. First though, I'd like to say that I don't subscribe to the ideal that Obama is some kind of savior. The man is a politician just like any other. If he wasn't a politician he wouldn't be in the position that he's in now. There are definately a slew of kool-aid drinkers following the Obama campaign, just like there are a slew of the same following McCain/Palin. I don't believe he was "born in a manger" by any means. What I do believe though is that he will legitimately fight for the working class. That is what this country needs and what this country hungers for after the past 8 years under the Bush administration. The upper class has enjoyed the hell out of the last 8 years with tax cuts, etc. While people like myself have been floundering at the bottom of the barrell just begging for a little bit of that "trickle down" to start trickling. I've not seen one drop of that sweet financial nectar. Finding a job is hard because small businesses are closing down within months of opening. People (as a matter of fact, 2 people I can think of just recently that I knew and were very close to me) are dying because our healthcare system is so broken that people cannot get the help they need because they can't afford it. And the economy has been in trouble for years now and it's finally come crashing down around us. If these points aren't proof enough that we need something new then I, nor anyone, will be able to convince anyone otherwise. It's like Clair McCaskill said of the Obama campaign. "This isn't a campaign that trickled down from Washington. This is a movement that bubbled up from the middle class." In general to answer your question (and I really do hope i'm comming off as civil as I mean to, because you are intitled to your beliefs as much as I am. I don't want to come across as being an asshat, I'm just very passionate.) Barack Obama represents to me an administration that honestly is going to work for the middle class. That is what I've been waiting for since I first got into politics around the Gulf War. Clinton was close, but just didn't cut the mustard. If I need to post specifics, I'd happily do that as well. - I'm all for the tax increases that Barack Obama has proposed for people making over 250,000.00/yr. And that's not because I don't fall within that bracket. If I made that much money I'd be more than happy to go back to the taxes that were implemented under the Clinton administration. I subscribe to the belief that we are not a country of singulars. I am not "Me" and you are not "You". I believe "We" are "America" and we should act as such. When there is a group of us hurting, the better off should help. The lower class isn't getting that help, so I believe it's at a desperate enough point that the government needs to step in and start helping that lower class. Just my opinion. An argument alot of people like to use against Obama's tax plan is that the tax increase could hurt small businesses. Here's my problem with that. Conservatives like to argue that if you cut tazes for big business then that would cause those businesses to create new jobs. I just don't see how that's true. It's common knowledge that a majority of big businesses are greedy. It's all about that bottom line. The almighty dollar. Now if a business is doing well enough that they fall within that tax cut zone under Bush or McCain, why would they increase their workforce? It's just going to increase the cost of payroll and other individual worker related expenses. They are already making huge money, why lose that money they're making just to "give back and create jobs"? I just find that idea insane. However, if you can give tax cuts to that 95% (or whatever the actual percentage is, I'm sure the Obama campaign has inflated that number somehow. It's politics) of people who are making less than 250,000.00/yr then that gives them just that much more motivation to go to school, start businesses, work harder, etc. It's a great motivation when you've been working at a job for 5 years, making the same BS money for the past 2 years because you've capped out on the amount of raises you can get, then one day you get a paycheck and see that extra 20 or 30 or 50 dollars on your check. At that point, bills get easier to pay, money is easier to save, gas is easier to afford, so on and so on. I just don't believe you can stimulate the economy by giving more money to the richest people in the world. It hasn't worked over the past 8 years and it just won't work for 4 more. We need to motivate the lower and middle class to get out and be the best they can be. That is how we need to stimulate the economy. - Another specific is what Obama has proposed as far as the budget. We need budget reform in this country and we need it badly. There are so many programs that we are pumping so much money into that we don't need and don't work. We need someone to go through as Obama says "line by line" and get rid of that nonsense we don't need and that dosen't work. And make all the programs that do work more efficient and cost worthy. McCain is proposing a spending freeze across the board. That would be a deathnail to all the programs that are working well and just need some trimming around the edges. That's dangerous, if you ask me. But with programs like No Child Left Behind and whatnot, we need cuts. We need to get rid of BS programs like that. We can then start from scratch and reform what we do have and bring in some that we don't have and that we need. A cliche that's been thrown around through the campaign season has been "John McCain is using a hatchet where Obama will be using a scalpel." and McCain has responded with "I'll use the hatchet and THEN the scalpel." That just dosen't work for me. I mean, if you need surgery on your arm and you chop it off with that hatchet then use the scalpel on it... You're just cutting up a corpse of an arm. It just dosen't work, in my opinion. - And just a short one, I'm not going to go into huge detail on this issue because honestly, I don't know enough of the details about this issue but from what I've heard so far I'm also in agreement with Barack Obama. Healthcare. After going through the things that I've gone through in my life and some of the issues I've face just recently with two family members of mine, I just cannot bring myself to trust healthcare left to the free market. There need to be more strict regulations on the healthcare industry. Healthcare shouldn't be a privelage, it should be a right. It should be something that we are all given from the day we're born untill the day we die. No person should have to lay on their death bed and spend the last days of their life worrying about leaving a huge bill to their family after they're gone. And with John McCain's plan it really seems that he's not only going to keep the same system we have now, but he's going to deregulate even more than it is. You cannot leave something as important as healthcare up to the free market. It just won't work. So many people across the country can vouch for that. The only thing that McCain is doing, seemingly, to ghange healthcare for the better is by giving the people a 5,000.00 credit to buy health insurance. That's all well and good, but the average price of health insurance for a year is around 12,000.00 (Mine through my job is actually closer to 10,000.00). So 5,000.00 just isn't enough. Not to mention, I love the idea that Obama wants to open up the healthcare plan that members of US congress have to the public. That is just a minute thing that really makes it feel like this could become less of a government by the rich and for the rich and more of a government by the people and for the people. Like it was intended. I could keep going but I won't seeing as how I didn't realize that Pat Buchanan is on Hardball with Chris Matthews and I always just love listening to the man talke, even though I don't agree with a majority of what he says. ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png)
|
|
|
Post by pazfan on Nov 3, 2008 4:40:26 GMT -5
I have a question I wanted to ask a couple weeks ago In the last debate, what was McCain doing at the end when he made that weird face? Did he know the camera was still on? And speaking of that debate, did he not learn from the 2000 election and Gore's eye rolls and audible sighs? I believe he went to shake Barack Obama's hand and Obama didn't notice and turned around. Then McCain made that awesome face so as to hide that tiny embarassing moment where you're left hanging. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png)
|
|
|
Post by pazfan on Nov 3, 2008 4:43:45 GMT -5
i think a point he was trying to make was that a huge part of the mccain/palin campaign was based around obama's inexperience. then mccain chose someone just as (in)experienced as they claim obama is. kinda defeats the purpose. Oh, absolutly. But it's also been a double edge sword for them. It fulfilled the whole "hey look, us Republicans have lady-types, too!", and got someone younger and, quite frankly, MILF'ier for the horny college demographic (is there really one?), however, it also opened them up to the same wrath they gave Hillary. Also, like Bush, having her appear "more approachable" in her conversations gave people the idea that she is stupid, which is far from the case. But her "inexperience" is also a huge counterpoint Pro-Bama-naughts use against Palin, even if they are pretty much both around the same timeframe as far as "administration skills" go. I don't know, but maybe Biden could say he was a POW himself to compete with McCain's "I'm a soldier" campaign, since politics IS nothing more than childish one-upsmanship. ... is there such thing as a horny male college demographic? I'm shocked that one isn't exploited more ![:-/](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/undecided.png) As much as I'm an Obama supporter, I think that if McCain would have made a better choice for VP he would be ahead of Obama by now. that experience issue would have been such a silver bullett for the McCain campaign. Instead he chose to try to get woomen to vote for him by selecting a woman who later ended up looking like a fool some say due to "gotcha journalism" others say due to "her foolishness". I think McCain could have won, and easily on the Obama inexperience ticket. Now it's a moot point, even though they still try to use it.
|
|
|
Post by kitsunestar on Nov 3, 2008 4:48:54 GMT -5
Also, this is funny, I actually HATED politics with a passion, but this election got me invigorated with politics. I'm actually thinking of possibly becoming a politician later on in my life. you know, I feel the same way. After the 04 election I had all but given up on politics. I was so disenfranchized. yet here i am, more energized and interested in the direction this country is going than i've ever been! I feel exactly the opposite. And I know that in the eyes of most here, that'll make me look like an inbred hick. But this has been the most sickening display I've seen out everyone involved in the coverage of this election. This election has made me so sick of politics and political coverage that I'd rather vote my neighbor's dog in as president than either of these two major-party candidates (I don't know enough about any of the "third" parties to vote for them in good faith). I'll be honest, I'm extremely worried about the backlash I'm going to get from almost everyone I know if I don't vote for Obama, but I don't trust him (or the shady figures that seem to hover around him) enough to vote for him, but I'd get TWICE the backlash if I vote FOR McCain. Argh. If only Rudy or Mitt had made it through the primary.
|
|