Campaign 2008

[Nightwing 0]

The voter fraud issue will ultimately be a non issue because theres 3 weeks time for them to clear out all the fake registrations but you are still left with a government/taxpayer funded organization who through the wonders of demographics seems to be biased towards registering only people who will more than likely vote for Obama over McCain.

 

post went here..

 

So, you going to make up any more bullshit?

 

 

source

 

An affiliate of ACORN, AHC (Acorn Housing Association) is federally chartered and recieves 40% of its budget from the government.

 

In 1994, AHC recieved grant money from Americorps and in the application for the grants that they were a seperate entity from ACORN itself. However a year later, the Americorps Inspector General concluded that "Not only did we find references to ACORN having 'created' AHC to serve purposes common to both organizations, we noted numerous transactions and activities involving 'fraternal' ACORN-related corporations." and demanded the money back.

 

Earlier this year the Consumer Rights League did an investigation into ACORN.

 

The affidavits from two former AHC employees, obtained by CRL following

the publication of its original report in June, "ACORN's Hypocritical House of

Cards," make further specific and damning allegations, including:

-- AHC and ACORN were at one time being funded from a joint account, which

would appear to violate the same laws highlighted by the AmeriCorps Inspector

General in 1994.

-- According to a former ACORN board member and AHC employee, AHC -- which

received taxpayer money -- directly used funds to support ACORN activities,

including paying for rent at an office where AHC was not even a tenant.

-- Perhaps most troubling, the sworn statement of former AHC staffer

Andrew Johnson suggests AHC leadership pressured employees to intentionally

hide information from HUD investigators.

 

Is that bullshit enough?

 

Yeah, still smells like bullshit. You're re-reading a press release from the Consumer Right's League. And yes, I know that's SourceWatch (Watch me disclose my sources' biases beforehand!), but reading their website it's not hard to see that they're not a very "unbiased" opinion.

 

Tell me when "Allegations" turn into something real. Because right now, you're still an idiot.

[Gary Floyd 0]

tl;dr

You know what? Fuck this. I quit.

[bob_barron 0]

tl;dr

You know what? Fuck this. I quit.

 

Good. Maybe we can get more posts that deal with the topic at hand, instead of you making sure to respond to any fringe CE poster with an attempt at snarkiness.

 

The problem with trying to play the Ayers and culture war stuff is that people just don't care. Maybe this would've worked in 1996 and 2000 when there were no big issues at hand, but right now, all anyone cares about is the economy and how the 44th president is going to fix it.

 

And sadly for McCain, he sucks at economy.

[Gary Floyd 0]

IMO, I think the Republicans are going to lose this election in a similar fashion the Conservative Party of Canada lost Canada'a general election in 1993. I think all of us are going to be surprised by the margin of defeat the Republicans are going to suffer in the federal, congressional and local races. I'm pretty sure that after this year, the Republicans are going to ditch the Religious Right once and for all, and we could see a dramatic return to power of the moderate wing of the Republican Party the nation saw pre-1980. Reaganomics and Reagan Republicans, I believe, will be history this year.

 

I wish this would happen, but I think it seems largely impossible. At this point, it's the only realy base they have. Giving up on that would hurt them too much, as it might take the Country a while to forgive them/forget what they've done to the country.

[Nightwing 0]

tl;dr

You know what? Fuck this. I quit.

The problem with trying to play the Ayers and culture war stuff is that people just don't care. Maybe this would've worked in 1996 and 2000 when there were no big issues at hand, but right now, all anyone cares about is the economy and how the 44th president is going to fix it.

 

And sadly for McCain, he sucks at economy.

 

I'm not sure it's just McCain... I think it's just about any Republican candidate. They've all basically harped the same party-line plan for the economy, and I don't see anyone being charismatic enough to get people to avoid that. People want Big Business reined in, and that's not the MO for the Republican Party.

[bob_barron 0]

I don't know if big changes will occur. The 2006 and 2008 elections were/will be referendums on W. It will be interesting to see what happens in the midterm 2010 elections.

[bob_barron 0]

I'm not sure it's just McCain... I think it's just about any Republican candidate. They've all basically harped the same party-line plan for the economy, and I don't see anyone being charismatic enough to get people to avoid that. People want Big Business reined in, and that's not the MO for the Republican Party.

 

Republicans always seem to lose when the issue is the economy anyway, but it's well known to be McCain's weakness. He was really gaining momentum after the Palin pick and the convention, but once the shit went down, Obama immediately regained his lead in the polls.

 

I think the Republicans were fucked from the beginning, but I was impressed with how close McCain was making it- it's really just bad luck for the guy.* He probably hates W. more than anyone.

 

 

 

*That and the conspiracy of AIG and the others to fail when Romney lost the nod.

 

[Nightwing 0]

I don't know if big changes will occur. The 2006 and 2008 elections were/will be referendums on W. It will be interesting to see what happens in the midterm 2010 elections.

 

I disagree. 2004/2006, yeah. But I don't think this election was a referendum on W; McCain was doing well enough until the economy tanked. I think it's a referendum on Republican Party more than anything. It feels like this frustration goes beyond just the President.

[bob_barron 0]

I disagree. 2004/2006, yeah. But I don't think this election was a referendum on W; McCain was doing well enough until the economy tanked. I think it's a referendum on Republican Party more than anything. It feels like this frustration goes beyond just the President.

 

McCain was doing well, but I feel he was always playing from behind because of W. and Obama would've won anyway, just by constantly linking W. to McCain.

 

If you're someone who strongly disapproves of W's presidency (which is a lot of people), why would you vote for another Republican?

[At Home 0]

I don't know if big changes will occur. The 2006 and 2008 elections were/will be referendums on W. It will be interesting to see what happens in the midterm 2010 elections.

 

I disagree. 2004/2006, yeah. But I don't think this election was a referendum on W; McCain was doing well enough until the economy tanked. I think it's a referendum on Republican Party more than anything. It feels like this frustration goes beyond just the President.

 

I can see how it could be a referendum on the Republican Party, but that doesn't really stand up to what happens in the primaries. After all, conservatives didn't nominate McCain, moderates, but mostly democrats who went out to republican primaries did. McCain rarely, if ever, got pluralities with people who identified as conservatives. Furthermore, the Obama camp's tactic of absolutely tying McCain to Bush with kevlar ropes is doing the best. Well, that and the economy.

 

[Nightwing 0]

I'm not sure it's just McCain... I think it's just about any Republican candidate. They've all basically harped the same party-line plan for the economy, and I don't see anyone being charismatic enough to get people to avoid that. People want Big Business reined in, and that's not the MO for the Republican Party.

 

Republicans always seem to lose when the issue is the economy anyway, but it's well known to be McCain's weakness. He was really gaining momentum after the Palin pick and the convention, but once the shit went down, Obama immediately regained his lead in the polls.

 

Point, though I think Palin hasn't helped him much. Her honeymoon was short, and her quick string of gaffes afterwards killed anything she brought in. I think, after she was exposed, she lost most of her drawing power by alienating independents to bring in the base.

 

I think the Republicans were fucked from the beginning, but I was impressed with how close McCain was making it- it's really just bad luck for the guy.* He probably hates W. more than anyone.

 

I'm sure he does. Anyone else remember the "Special hell" quote regarding Bush operatives? And yeah, it was his bad luck... but eventually, Republican luck had to run out sooner or later. They were hanging by a thread since 2006.

 

*That and the conspiracy of AIG and the others to fail when Romney lost the nod.

 

You'd think they would have folded as soon as he'd conceded... or at least reasonably close to then. But I suppose Colbert got it right on "The Word": Rome wasn't burnt in a day.

[bob_barron 0]

Point, though I think Palin hasn't helped him much. Her honeymoon was short, and her quick string of gaffes afterwards killed anything she brought in. I think, after she was exposed, she lost most of her drawing power by alienating independents to bring in the base.

 

I like what Joe Scarborough said on Colbert, in that if this election was a deadheat, Palin would be helpful since she could get out the base to come out and vote for McCain. But with the election treading toward Obama, there's not much she can do.

 

Republican luck had to run out sooner or later. They were hanging by a thread since 2006.

 

I think Katrina's what did it. The war going south didn't help, but that just looked bad.

[At Home 0]

Who gives a shit about bringing out the base? Bring out the moderates, win an election.

[Nightwing 0]

I disagree. 2004/2006, yeah. But I don't think this election was a referendum on W; McCain was doing well enough until the economy tanked. I think it's a referendum on Republican Party more than anything. It feels like this frustration goes beyond just the President.

 

McCain was doing well, but I feel he was always playing from behind because of W. and Obama would've won anyway, just by constantly linking W. to McCain.

 

If you're someone who strongly disapproves of W's presidency (which is a lot of people), why would you vote for another Republican?

 

Simple: "McCain is a moderate and can work with the other party." McCain is hardly the standard Republican candidate, though he has definitely tried to portray himself as such.

 

I can see how it could be a referendum on the Republican Party, but that doesn't really stand up to what happens in the primaries. After all, conservatives didn't nominate McCain, moderates, but mostly democrats who went out to republican primaries did. McCain rarely, if ever, got pluralities with people who identified as conservatives. Furthermore, the Obama camp's tactic of absolutely tying McCain to Bush with kevlar ropes is doing the best. Well, that and the economy.

 

I'm not sure how much that happened in other states. Certainly it was possible in Michigan, but Romney got the nod here and we're noted for having an "open primary".

 

And I don't think that tying McCain to Bush has worked that well; he was close enough even before he chose a running mate. I think that his reputation, even if it is a bit of a show, and his public splits with the Bush Administration kept that from truly gaining ground. If it wasn't for the economy, this race would be a lot closer than it is.

[bob_barron 0]

Who gives a shit about bringing out the base? Bring out the moderates, win an election.

 

Bringing out the base is what won in 2004.

 

Simple: "McCain is a moderate and can work with the other party." McCain is hardly the standard Republican candidate, though he has definitely tried to portray himself as such.

 

Obama has done a great job of countering that by constantly harping on the voting with Bush thing. McCain countering that with "that one" really didn't work too well.

 

If it wasn't for the economy, this race would be a lot closer than it is.

 

I agree. I remember the day the shit really hit the fan, Carville said Obama's won.

 

You can tell from his speeches, I think McCain knows it's over.

[At Home 0]

Who gives a shit about bringing out the base? Bring out the moderates, win an election.

 

Bringing out the base is what won in 2004.

 

Bush was an incumbent president, and nothing had really gone down the shitter enough to sway voters.

[bob_barron 0]

Bush was an incumbent president, and nothing had really gone down the shitter enough to sway voters.

 

Without getting out the base by playing on cultural war issues (gay marriage, stem cells etc) Bush wouldn't have won. John Kerry got the second most votes of anyone running for president, Bush needed every vote he could get to stay in office.

[Gary Floyd 0]

Republican luck had to run out sooner or later. They were hanging by a thread since 2006.

 

I think Katrina's what did it. The war going south didn't help, but that just looked bad.

 

I agree with this. I remember when Katrina happened, most of my relatives (who are hard core conservatives) pretty much grew fed up with them. Well, except for one part of the family, but I digress.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I honestly at this point actually hope that Obama wins, cause if he loses Im willing to bet the whole country will be nothing but looting and riots.

 

Maybe McCain should do his part to prevent that and quit now so Obama can win before he loses.

 

 

[DMann2003 0]

Hypothetical question: Is it possible that, while the downturn in the US Economy favors Obama/Democrats, if it continues to spiral downward as we approach the election, will some voters be like "whoa, this is too out of control, a sharp change is too risky right now, I'll vote McCain".

[bob_barron 0]

No, because McCain's debate strategy of randomly throw out drastic economic policies doesn't make him look any less risky.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I haven't heard a good "The economy is in such bad shape that Bush will use some powers he signed into law secretly himself to stay in office for the good of the country" rumor yet. I thought that would be running wild about now.

[Nightwing 0]

Hypothetical question: Is it possible that, while the downturn in the US Economy favors Obama/Democrats, if it continues to spiral downward as we approach the election, will some voters be like "whoa, this is too out of control, a sharp change is too risky right now, I'll vote McCain".

 

No, because I think people are firmly committed to changing things. They're tired of Bush and what has happened on his watch. McCain isn't enough of a change (if a change at all) on economics. Since the spiral leading up the election and likely for the next year will be blamed on Bush, I don't see people suddenly switching Republican without some sort of stock market miracle occurring.

[bob_barron 0]

I haven't heard a good "The economy is in such bad shape that Bush will use some powers he signed into law secretly himself to stay in office for the good of the country" rumor yet. I thought that would be running wild about now.

 

It's happening in NYC with Michael Bloomberg

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

I haven't heard a good "The economy is in such bad shape that Bush will use some powers he signed into law secretly himself to stay in office for the good of the country" rumor yet. I thought that would be running wild about now.

 

It's happening in NYC with Michael Bloomberg

 

Yeah, but he's not an evil Republican anymore

[SuperJerk 0]

There was a pretty good later episode of The West Wing called "The Mommy Problem" where the campaign manager for the Democratic nominee laid out exactly how and why elections are won or lost at the presidential level. Basically, he said, that elections aren't about competing answers to the same question, but control of the question itself. If the question is national security, the Republicans win. If the question is economics, the Democrats win. All issues fit into 3 categories: security, economics, and trivia (stories beyond the campaign's control that get lots of press attention). Democratic campaigns have to fight to keep the focus on economics, or they lose every time.

 

I think the theory is sound because since the start of the Great Depression, the only Republican that I've ever seen win by running on economic issues was Ronald Reagan, but he still had the Iran hostage crisis and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan to run against. If the Cold War hadn't ended in 1991, I don't think Bill Clinton could have gotten elected.

[SuperJerk 0]

http://black-man.ytmnd.com/

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I haven't heard a good "The economy is in such bad shape that Bush will use some powers he signed into law secretly himself to stay in office for the good of the country" rumor yet. I thought that would be running wild about now.

 

Probably because most people aren't that retarded.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

I haven't heard a good "The economy is in such bad shape that Bush will use some powers he signed into law secretly himself to stay in office for the good of the country" rumor yet. I thought that would be running wild about now.

 

Probably because most people aren't that retarded.

I'll take that bet...

 

...on the retarded part that is.

[At Home 0]