Campaign 2008

[SuperJerk 0]

I'm throwing this out there again...

 

Wrong Paul: Fantasy, fallacy and factual fumbles from the Republican insurgent.

[NoCalMike 0]

The only guess I can make at the Ron Paul cult is that maybe he gave a voice to the conservatives and indy voters that didn't like the war, so they just overlooked everything else coming out of his mouth.

 

As a liberal I did appreciate some of the dialogue he brought up during the republican debates on the Iraq/War on Terrorism issue, however on anything other then that subject he had me doing double-takes at the screen wondering if I was actually believing what I was hearing.

[Ripper 0]

I really can't do much more than laugh whenever somebody tries to use that 'what's Obama's plan?' canard anymore. After so many specific-issue speeches and statements, he is far more detailed in his actual plan than either Clinton or McCain. I know the media hasn't caught on to that yet (still giving Hillary a free pass on milking fabricated war experiences) but I'd kinda like to think we're all a bit smarter than them.

Yeah I know I know that I am a few days late, but..

 

I read the Obama Blueprint for change thing and honestly, its really cute, but...um...

 

 

Americans don't have health care.. I GONNA GIVE THEM HEALTH CARE.

 

Americans pay alot of taxes. I AM GONNA CUT TAXES

 

Education is not where it needs to be: I AM GONNA MAKE IT BETTER.

 

Americans don't have enough money : I AM GOING TO RAISE MINIMUM WAGE EVERY YEAR WITH INFLATION.

 

We need alternative fuels : I am going to DOUBLE the research MONEY.

 

The government spend too much money : I am gonna make them stop it!!!

 

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict? i am gonna make'em love each other in peace.

 

Genocide in Darfur? I am gonna so make the UN stop it (because this will magically become the power of the US president I guess)

 

 

 

I am kinda missing the section where he pays for all this shit. He names all this stuff that he will do ,which is cute,, but honestly, this isn't a fantasy game. You have to pay for EVERYTHING that gets done. You can't cut taxes then add a couple of hundred programs costing hundreds of billions of dollars. Oh, and he is going to cut government spending...despite adding ALL these goddamn programs, that will be paid for by less taxes.

 

And his Iraq plan was to just get everyone out in 16 months. Thats not really a plan to me. Immediately just start moving out brigades A: Makes things more dangerous for the remaining military people there and B: Doesn't solve the issue that yes, an immediate pullout of Iraq could have very bad consequences.

 

if you disagree with the war, fine, but I don't see how anyone would think just pulling troops out would be a good thing.

 

I mean, really. He is saying "hey, we will just give Iran stuff to stop beign bad". I am sorry, but his plans are quite utopian. I need realistic change to the problems, not someone just rattling off BS.

 

So laugh all you want, the question still remains.

 

What has he presented to actually make the change. I can do what he has done. Americans are broke. I propose that we give them more money. OOOOOOHHHH, I am progressive.

 

So if anyone would like to point me in the right direction to make me start giving a shit about this guy, then fine.

[EricMM 0]

Tax the rich / undo the tax cuts.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Ripper, I don't really feel like responding to every point, but your credibility on this is greatly diminished by this:

 

The only way he is getting my vote is if my man John Edwards gets on his ticket, because I will vote for some John Edwards.

 

Please explain how Edwards' policy positions were superior to Obama's, if you will. The only two differences I can think of off the top of my head (as someone who wasn't able to decide between Edwards & Obama while Edwards was still in):

 

a.) Edwards' universal health care plan was slightly different

b.) Edwards jettisoned the "War on Terror" ® brand name

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I'm throwing this out there again...

 

Wrong Paul: Fantasy, fallacy and factual fumbles from the Republican insurgent.

 

The problem with Paul's claim is that there are no plans to build a NAFTA Superhighway. Or a North American Union, for that matter. And while the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America does exist, it’s just a boring bureaucracy.

 

I love this. I have been listening to Lou Dobbs' (the real one, not the TSM one) radio show and he is still going on about this despite the fact that it doesn't exist.

[SuperJerk 0]

It was every candidate grill Petraeus day on Capitol Hill.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24013119/

[Atticus Chaos 0]

You can have your Tiger Woods. We have Senator McCain.

 

 

David Belluvia, before introducing Mccain at a rally. Bacause, you know, they all look alike.

[Ripper 0]

Ripper, I don't really feel like responding to every point, but your credibility on this is greatly diminished by this:

 

The only way he is getting my vote is if my man John Edwards gets on his ticket, because I will vote for some John Edwards.

 

Please explain how Edwards' policy positions were superior to Obama's, if you will. The only two differences I can think of off the top of my head (as someone who wasn't able to decide between Edwards & Obama while Edwards was still in):

 

a.) Edwards' universal health care plan was slightly different

b.) Edwards jettisoned the "War on Terror" ® brand name

 

 

Oh easy. Edwards suggestions for change for the most part are an adjustment of current policies already in place. Obama gives a list of all these new programs that will be added without providing a actual way of paying for it. In other words, the vast majority of Edwards suggestions for change take sectors that already have funding and change how they do it. Obama says create completely new sectors and pay for it with the mystery money.

 

I don't like EVERYTHING about Edwards. I am not a fan of his Iraq pullout plan which is dumber than Obamas honestly. I like his health plan better, his tax plans better, and love his plan to get every child into college and all they have to do is a certain number of community service hours a week to get it paid for.

 

Simply put, Edwards ideas are more based in reality while when I looked at Obamas blueprint for change, it really just looks like he is throwing alot of money at the problems while at the same time giving less money to the government with his even higher tax cuts. I just don't see it as realistic.

[EricMM 0]

Ripper, he doesn't have higher tax cuts.

 

He would eliminate the Bush Tax Cuts.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Basically, Ripper, in my opinion, you are hugely distorting Obama's policy positions. I don't wanna do a MikeSC-style line by line breakdown because I don't really feel like it and you probably don't feel like reading it. But, for example, on health care, the plan is much more complex than, "everybody gets free health care" (and you know that). It has cost containment mechanisms & employer contributions on the funding front. And you act as if the Iraq plan is a Kucinich-esque "just pull out" plan rather than phased withdrawal coupled with intensified regional diplomacy. You also completely ignore the fact that Obama would roll back Bush's tax cuts in the top brackets, which would be a major source of new funding (not to mention his desire to institute "pay as you go" spending, ending tax loopholes, & his good governance proposals for pork barrel spending reform & the like on the fiscal front).

[EricMM 0]

I mean for goodness sakes, Obama's plan specifically ISN'T "everyone gets free health insurance"

[snuffbox 0]

It is a lot easier to just make stuff up about somebody or say he doesn't "have a plan", though.

[EricMM 0]

[Atticus Chaos 0]

I was watching MSNBC, and apparently most of the uncommited superdelegates are for Obama and not uncommitted but undeclared, but are too afraid to say so for fear of what the Clinton's will do. Most hope the Pennsyvania voters will do the dirty work for them so they won't have to. This tells you all you need to know about the current state of democrat party.

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

Boy, that's a handsome parrot.

 

Any ideas on the potential VPs out there?

[Atticus Chaos 0]

Tim Pawlenty is supposed to be a strong favourite for the republican VP spot.

 

 

As for Obama..I think Biden. Richardson has been suggested, but I think Obama's team are smart enough to know two minorities would just be too threatening for some people.

 

I'd feel way more confident about Obama's chances if he had Clinton as his veep. But that's just not going to happen now. Which is a shame because at one point it would have been a dream ticket.

 

 

 

[Atticus Chaos 0]

Oh, and my new favourite poll

 

26% "ANGRY OR UPSET" BY FEMALE PRESIDENT

 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/blogphoto...Anger_Study.gif

 

 

 

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/...8_04/013495.php

 

 

What's crazy is that it was roughly the same amount as women as men. How can 25% of women be angry about a female president?

[Guest Vitamin X]

They know their place, that's why.

[SuperJerk 0]

My money is on SC Governor Mike Sanford.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

Being angry about a female president?

[Dobbs 3K 0]

Tim Pawlenty is supposed to be a strong favourite for the republican VP spot.

 

WHO? I'm not joking, I've never heard that name before in my entire life.

 

On the GOP side, the Condi rumors are intriguing, though I doubt it will happen.

[snuffbox 0]

Our neighbor, Invader.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Condi as VP would be a pretty good move on the GOP's side of things, especially if Obama gets the nomination.

 

Apparently, according to some new polls, a McCain-Condi ticket could even carry New York. I think Richardson should get the VP spot if Obama wins- they looked pretty good together when they held a rally here in Portland.

 

Source

[Guest Teal-y Dan]

Pawlenty is the governor of Minnesota. Last I heard, he was taking some heat and they were kind of sick of him for being pouty and partisan, or something. Minnesota elects weird people.

[Atticus Chaos 0]

Condi as VP would be a pretty good move on the GOP's side of things, especially if Obama gets the nomination.

 

 

Source

 

 

Condi is not going to take the black vote from Obama. She's very unpopular within the black community (as well as everyone else). The shoe shopping during Katrina may have been the last straw.

[snuffbox 0]

Come on, American voters have the ability to delude themselves into thinking John Edwards and John McCain are kinda the same. Don't think they won't elect a continuation of the Bush Jr policies just because of the VP candidate. On the whole, we don't think too much.

[Atticus Chaos 0]

Come on, American voters have the ability to delude themselves into thinking John Edwards and John McCain are kinda the same. Don't think they won't elect a continuation of the Bush Jr policies just because of the VP candidate. On the whole, we don't think too much.

 

 

I just can't believe everyone's saying how fed up they are Bush, and are now prepared to choose a guy who's actually said he's going to continue Bush's policies.

 

And if Mccain does get elected, you can bet in a year's time these will be the same people moaning about the continuing Iraq war, the economy, the increasing cost of healthcare and how their lives still havn't improved.

 

What can you do with people like that?

[snuffbox 0]

I wish I could answer that.

[Atticus Chaos 0]

What shocked me was seeing Ohio polls that say Mccain is ahead of both Clinton and Obama in GE polls. I pray that's just because of the drawn out democratic battle and the majority aren't seriously thinking of voting for him.

 

How in the hell can Ohio possibly go red again? A lot of people there at at absolute breaking point, probably more than any other state, losing jobs, homes, soldiers and they're going to vote again for the party that has basically got them to that point ?

 

Seriously, I have to wonder whether voters in Ohio are sadomasochistic or something. I mean, how long before you realize you've been had?

 

At some point, you have to think a lot of voters get what they deserve. It's difficult to feel sorry for people who don't seem to want to help themselves.