Text Size

No Holds Barred

The Palin Factor

Need to get something off your chest? Have a topic that doesn't fit one of the other forums? Rant away in here. Mature audiences only, not for the easily offended.

Moderators: peeker643, swerb, Ziner

Unread postby idoctribefan » Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:51 pm

WarAdmiral wrote:She is a star at the moment, and this has been well played by the Publicans. Time will tell if she is a Robert Dinero, or a Val Kilmer.

She caused me to donate more to Obama today.


You'll be wishing you had some of that money back when he forces you to give him extra money starting in April of 2010.
"And three of the better guys in franchise history, Daugherty, Z and now Kyrie could get hurt in a rubber room full of cotton balls." - Leadpipe
User avatar
idoctribefan
 
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Joe Haden
Least Favorite Player: #6

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:01 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
Um, they do have a response: "Same old politics, different day." Even if it was prepared prior to Palin's speech, she didn't disappoint.


Yeah, that reform angle is the same old. It has been used before but actually has some validity.

Obama is ALSO more of the same. Same policies of Jimmy Carter. Same socialist policies that they've been trying to push like their "tax cut" that's actually a rebate that goes to people who haven't paid any taxes. That's what we call redistribution of wealth. Socialized medicine. More taxes. A sever recession, just like Carter helped with. Jennifer Granholm applied Obama's economic policies in Michigan and made things worse. Same old Big Government crap.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:04 pm

WarAdmiral wrote:She is a star at the moment, and this has been well played by the Publicans. Time will tell if she is a Robert Dinero, or a Val Kilmer.

She caused me to donate more to Obama today.


One of the few who has. Reports are now circulating that Obama is spending much more than he's taking in and only has a small cash cushion. They sent out desperate e-mails today.

The DNC is also struggling. McCain and the RNC has $300 million to spend in the next 60 days. The DNC and Obama are sitting at around $100M, if that. They might be able to get up to $150-175M.

Deep doo-doo indeed. They didn't expect to run up against an energized conservative base. The game has changed and Palin changed it.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:09 pm

BooyaCS wrote:Interesting read for anyone that wants to see the rebuttal.

http://www.samefacts.com/archives/campaign_2008_/2008/09/palin_v_reality.php


Have to put on my boots for that one as they attempt to manipulate data.

Love how they try to make being investigated for abuse of power as a contradiction. Innocent until proven guilty only applies to Democrats, eh?

It's not worth my time to go through that thing. I'm sick of debunking the schmucks because it'll do know good for people like Booya that will never see the light.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Thu Sep 04, 2008 11:53 pm

Great article by Michael Reagan.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... k_dad.html

I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we’d never see his like again because he was one of a kind.

I was wrong!

Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she.


As hard as you might try, you won’t find that kind of plain-spoken, down-to-earth, self-reliant American in the upper ranks of the liberal-infested, elitist Democratic Party, or in the Obama campaign.

Sarah Palin didn’t go to Harvard, or fiddle around in urban neighborhood leftist activism while engaging in opportunism within the ranks of one of the nation’s most corrupt political machines, never challenging it and going along to get along, like Barack Obama.

Instead she took on the corrupt establishment in Alaska and beat it, rising to the governorship while bringing reforms to every level of government she served in on her way up the ladder.

Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby waborat » Fri Sep 05, 2008 8:46 am

Mr. MacPhisto wrote:Great article by Michael Reagan.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... k_dad.html

I’ve been trying to convince my fellow conservatives that they have been wasting their time in a fruitless quest for a new Ronald Reagan to emerge and lead our party and our nation. I insisted that we’d never see his like again because he was one of a kind.

I was wrong!

Wednesday night I watched the Republican National Convention on television and there, before my very eyes, I saw my Dad reborn; only this time he's a she.


As hard as you might try, you won’t find that kind of plain-spoken, down-to-earth, self-reliant American in the upper ranks of the liberal-infested, elitist Democratic Party, or in the Obama campaign.

Sarah Palin didn’t go to Harvard, or fiddle around in urban neighborhood leftist activism while engaging in opportunism within the ranks of one of the nation’s most corrupt political machines, never challenging it and going along to get along, like Barack Obama.

Instead she took on the corrupt establishment in Alaska and beat it, rising to the governorship while bringing reforms to every level of government she served in on her way up the ladder.

Welcome back, Dad, even if you’re wearing a dress and bearing children this time around.


Awesome read Mac...thx for sharing
User avatar
waborat
 
Posts: 4096
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Concord
Favorite Player: Megyn Kelly
Least Favorite Player: Single digit temps

Unread postby CP » Fri Sep 05, 2008 9:41 am

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articl ... nizer.html

Anyone have any response to this issue that they have seen? I haven't had too much time to look, but Malkin is throwing some pretty hefty grenades at Obama this morning. I hadn't seen the argument this detailed to date, and am just now starting to search out rebuttals.

Particularly, this part of the article is where my attention got focused:

ACORN's political arm endorsed Obama in February and has ramped up efforts to register voters across the country. In the meantime, completely ignored by the mainstream commentariat and clean-election crusaders, the Obama campaign admitted failing to report $800,000 in campaign payments to ACORN. They were disguised as payments to a front group called "Citizen Services, Inc." for "advance work."


Again, not necessarily trying to engage the Obama supporters in lengthy diatribes, but if anyone happens to have some kind of acknowledgement/rebuttal piece with a link handy, I'd really like to take a look at it.
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:07 am

That's disturbing CP. I knew about ACORN already and the joke that they are but I didn't realize that they had gotten this involved. I thought Obama was staying away from them because of their known hardball tactics and corruption.

The Republicans attacking his community organizer job puts him in a precarious position. If he tries too hard to defend his work then this stuff will come out and his years of being an agitator for the welfare state will become more common knowledge. That's not hope and change.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:22 am

And now more media news. Oprah is apparently afraid of inviting Palin onto her show because of the damage it would do to Obama. She's getting tons of requests through her website to invite Palin and her staffers are divided.

Maybe more media backlash brewing?

http://drudgereport.com/flash3os.htm

And Rasmussen polling now indicates that Sarah Palin is more popular than Obama or McCain. I think McCain likes that.

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/05/g ... ain-obama/

The TV ratings have also been slightly revised indicating that more people watched Palin's speech than Obama's despite Palin only airing on seven networks as opposed to Obama's 10.

This has got to be frustrating and worrisome for Obama. There he was, ignoring most duties in the Senate, failing to call meetings in his subcommittee, going out and campaigning for 19 months. He's spent most of his term in the Senate working on his Presidential campaign and ignoring most important matters of state that couldn't impact the Presidential race and here comes Sarah Palin and she becomes a star as big or bigger than him in just one week.

And for all the praise that the press have heaped on Obama, it was the negative stuff thrown at Palin that has done the most good and made people think that the media is even more in the tank for Obama - and some of that backlash, fairly or unfairly, is going to come back at him.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby skatingtripods » Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:23 am

Mr. MacPhisto wrote:That's disturbing CP. I knew about ACORN already and the joke that they are but I didn't realize that they had gotten this involved. I thought Obama was staying away from them because of their known hardball tactics and corruption.

The Republicans attacking his community organizer job puts him in a precarious position. If he tries too hard to defend his work then this stuff will come out and his years of being an agitator for the welfare state will become more common knowledge. That's not hope and change.


It doesn't matter if that's true or not. The liberal media will never pick up the story and if it makes Fox News, it'll be dismissed as conservative bias. So there's no way it will change anyone's mind or even slightly sway their opinion of Obama.
A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe
User avatar
skatingtripods
Sloth Duncan
 
Posts: 14346
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Cleveland
Favorite Player: Mike Aviles
Least Favorite Player: Every Detroit Tiger

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:27 am

Skating Tripods wrote:It doesn't matter if that's true or not. The liberal media will never pick up the story and if it makes Fox News, it'll be dismissed as conservative bias. So there's no way it will change anyone's mind or even slightly sway their opinion of Obama.


I don't know. Part of me thinks that the backlash towards the media due to their coverage of Palin might make them actually turn around and look into some of this stuff as a way of recovering "journalistic integrity". They know new media is growing and that when they do stuff like that that their viewership and readership takes a serious hit. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them ended up going after Obama's own history in an attempt to seem fair. If any of the major media players do that then I think he's got real problems.

ADDENDUM:

McCain gets more viewers than Obama according to preliminary numbers:

http://www.tvweek.com/news/2008/09/mcca ... bama_i.php

Add that to revisions in Palin's numbers and it looks like BOTH Republicans on the ticket outdrew Obama.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby peeker643 » Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:54 am

Interesting and fresh approach. Courtesy of the Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1220573 ... columnists
User avatar
peeker643
Duly Noted
 
Posts: 22711
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:33 pm
Favorite Player: Smokey Rowe
Least Favorite Player: Dingle Stetson

Unread postby BooyaCS » Fri Sep 05, 2008 12:47 pm

Palin isn't going to do squat for McCain. There are no fresh ideas no substance to anything they say and their only rethoric is Hey we have more experience (at what I have no idea).

All we get from the Reps is more politics as usual. More lies more na na speech but again nothing to distinguish Bush from McCain.

That article I posted had a lot of facts in it. Yes Palin is being investigated yet everyone is Poo pooing this because she is a Republican.

Look in the legal system you are innocent until proven guilty. Not in the court of public opinion.

There is nothing that McCain or Palin has said to get us out of the economic mess that Bush got us in (if you don't think that it is related to the president then you're smoking something really good).
BooyaCS
 
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:54 pm

Unread postby CP » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:07 pm

BooyaCS wrote:Palin isn't going to do squat for McCain. There are no fresh ideas no substance to anything they say and their only rethoric is Hey we have more experience (at what I have no idea).


The polling data released thus far disagrees with you. According to Rasmussen, she currently has approval ratings higher than McCain or Obama, and according to Rasmussen, it's a 1 point race now.

We won't know her true impact on the polling until next week.
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby BooyaCS » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:10 pm

My main gripe is when you come out and propose change and yet (from the speeches) I have heard it is more of the same.

The country needs changes I can give a shit how Washington runs.

New fresh ideas for helping the country. This is why I am leaning towards Obama.
BooyaCS
 
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:54 pm

Unread postby CP » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:16 pm

BooyaCS wrote:My main gripe is when you come out and propose change and yet (from the speeches) I have heard it is more of the same.

The country needs changes I can give a shit how Washington runs.

New fresh ideas for helping the country. This is why I am leaning towards Obama.


I guess I don't see the "more of the same" argument. Are they still conservatives? For sure they are.

However, both Palin and McCain have backgrounds that suggest they will do what they want, irrespective of their party's ultimate wishes.

Palin's raising of taxes on big oil in Alaska wasn't more of the same there. Her use of the line-item veto in Alaska to cut spending programs wasn't more of the same. Her desire to provide aid to special needs children is not more of the same (and to add, Cindy McCain's background with special needs children as well).

McCain has been a dissident and a thorn in Bush's side for 8 years. People have quickly forgotten that his name was coming up as a possible running mate for Kerry in 2004. How he went from possibly running against Bush/Cheney in 2004 and then to "more of the same" in 2008 is beyond me.

The conservative stance hasn't changed with regard to social issues and the conservative stance hasn't changed with regard to fiscal issues, either. The 21st century Republicans haven't exactly followed the conservative stance, at least from this conservative's perspective.

Booya, I'm not challenging you or trying to spin your argument. I'm just replying honestly here. I heard the same speech you did, and I don't think the "more of the same" argument applies. Certainly no one would ever expect Bush to say that the education issue is the "civil rights issue" of this century, no?
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:27 pm

BooyaCS wrote:That article I posted had a lot of facts in it. Yes Palin is being investigated yet everyone is Poo pooing this because she is a Republican.


No, they're poo-pooing it because there is very little merit to the investigation and it is clearly being cooked up by her enemies in the Democrat and Republican Party because she dismantled their machine.

There is nothing that McCain or Palin has said to get us out of the economic mess that Bush got us in (if you don't think that it is related to the president then you're smoking something really good).


You've got to be smoking something really good to tag everything on the President.

How's about this? Thirty years of liberal environmentalist agenda politics has prevented the expansion of US oil drilling and US refining capacity causing both the US and global markets to be more susceptible to higher energy prices. That is a big part of inflation.

Now, the President bears some responsibility for not bringing in the regulators and allowing them to use bad promises to get bad loans made. That started with Clinton's administration and carried into Bush's.

Even so, I believe the current unemployment rate is still slightly better than the average unemployment rate of the Clinton Administration and the US GDP has led the world in growth during Bush's tenure, more than doubling the growth found in places like Germany and the EU as a whole.

And McCain clearly did draw a contrast with Bush because of his promises for decreased spending and lower corporate taxes, two things that would cause a great lift to the economy by strengthening the dollar and encouraging more business investment.

Barack Obama has committed to raise taxes on every American despite his "tax cut" promise. Those increased corporate taxes, increased capital gains taxes, etc all end up getting passed down the line so that the little guy on the bottom ends up having to pay more.

Barack Obama has not committed to ending deficit spending. John McCain has. Barack Obama is more of the same when it comes to the Bush deficit and his would be even larger than Bush's. His tax increases would cause investment and business to leave the US and would actually result in less revenue for the Federal Gov't, a much deeper recession that could turn into a depression, and higher unemployment rates that could enter double digits.

Barack Obama would be a disaster for the US, possibly beyond the Carter disaster.

People like Booya just don't see it because they have Bush Derangement Syndrome. They can't think straight because their emotions blind them to any kind of rational thought.

McCain is clearly the one with a reform record as is Palin. Both have upset their party's infrastructure while Barack Obama was busy voting with his Democrat buddies 97% of the time. That's change we can believe in.

A vote for Barack Obama is a vote for the policies of Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It's a vote for incompetence in government and the growth of even more corruption in Washington.

But the bloom is coming off the rose. The money is not pouring in like it once was. The TV audience tuned in, but even more people watched McCain. Palin's speech was not carried by Univision or Telemundo but even more hispanics watched her compared to Obama.

And all Obama and his surrogates can do is pull out the "McCain=Bush" card that nobody except rabid partisans buy. A Democrat I work with called that plan a complete loser because even she knows that McCain and Bush disagree on many things.

And now we have a new Woodward book where McCain is quoted as being fiercely critical of the President. Yep, keep saying that McCain is another Bush. The problem is getting sane Americans to believe it.

Another funny thing is that the left has rightfully criticized Bush for not admitting when he was wrong. He didn't do it with Iraq until late in the game. He should have done so much earlier and made correction.

We see the same traits from Barack Obama. He was unwilling to admit he was wrong on the surge on O'Reilly. He has shown a Bush-like tendency for failing to admit when he messed up. His campaign is also showing that same tendency by failing to see when it has a losing formula and changing course. McCain's campaign just DID change course and is reaping the benefits. That's leadership.

If you want four more years of massive deficit spending, vote for Obama. If you want four more years of the leadership failing to admit mistakes, vote for Obama. If you want more entitlements and more taxes, vote for Obama. If you want fewer jobs for our children and a higher tax burden for them, vote for Obama. If you want a weaker military and a stronger Iran and Russia, vote for Obama. If you want an even weaker dollar and even higher oil prices, vote for Obama.

If you want a real chance at doing something, McCain is your man. If you want to drill now, vote McCain. If you want lower taxes, more jobs, and higher wages, vote for McCain

The choice is simple. Obama is more of the same Washington politics. He is the Jimmy Carter redux. McCain has a record of change and Palin has a record for shaking up the establishment. Obama has a history of having an opportunity to change things, like he did in Chicago, and turning his back on those opportunities.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby CP » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:41 pm

Mr. MacPhisto wrote:If you want four more years of massive deficit spending, vote for Obama. If you want four more years of the leadership failing to admit mistakes, vote for Obama. If you want more entitlements and more taxes, vote for Obama. If you want fewer jobs for our children and a higher tax burden for them, vote for Obama. If you want a weaker military and a stronger Iran and Russia, vote for Obama. If you want an even weaker dollar and even higher oil prices, vote for Obama.

If you want a real chance at doing something, McCain is your man. If you want to drill now, vote McCain. If you want lower taxes, more jobs, and higher wages, vote for McCain

The choice is simple. Obama is more of the same Washington politics. He is the Jimmy Carter redux. McCain has a record of change and Palin has a record for shaking up the establishment. Obama has a history of having an opportunity to change things, like he did in Chicago, and turning his back on those opportunities.


This is the point that a lot of people aren't getting, IMO. Bush's fiscal policy has been that of a free-spending liberal (ala Jimmy Carter). I certainly didn't vote for him in 2004 to do what he has done. I don't have the same gripes that most people have with Bush on foreign policy, but his domestic economic policy has been putrid.

I know it's blasphemy for someone on the left to even think that Bush is one of them, but in my view he sure as hell has been spending like he was one of them.
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:54 pm

CP wrote:This is the point that a lot of people aren't getting, IMO. Bush's fiscal policy has been that of a free-spending liberal (ala Jimmy Carter). I certainly didn't vote for him in 2004 to do what he has done. I don't have the same gripes that most people have with Bush on foreign policy, but his domestic economic policy has been putrid.

I know it's blasphemy for someone on the left to even think that Bush is one of them, but in my view he sure as hell has been spending like he was one of them.


I'm of the same camp. Bush is a free spending liberal on domestic issues. I did dislike his failure to admit problems with some foreign policy issues, but I appreciate the more aggressive foreign policy approach.

I was greatly upset at his failure to curb ridiculous Republican spending. It wasn't just Bush that got out of control on spending, the Republicans we sent to DC did too.

Bush is a mixed bag to me and has been for some time. He hasn't lived up to my expectations of him. He's approved some of the most massive entitlement programs ever and that makes me unhappy. McCain has been much better than Bush in regards to the Medicare Drug Plan.

Conservatives have not been happy with Bush or the Republicans. Data from 2006 shows that that was a significant factor in Republican losses - the conservative base refused to either show up or to vote for those bozos. If more Republicans latch into Palin and admit the wrongdoings of the past, I think this year can be much better than many predicted. McCain opened the door last night by admitting the failings of the Republican Party over the past few years. The Republicans need to be adamant about sticking to their principles and publicly rebuking those who do not, even in our own party.

We're working on it in our party down here in Florida due to our Governor's failure to adhere to the fiscal discipline we expect out of a Republican and the failure to secure the tax reform he promised because he was not bold enough to move forward. We're going to work hard to oust him in the primary and get someone like Marco Rubio, a much stronger conservative, to push him out of office.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby CP » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:08 pm

Accordingly, that is a big reason there is such discord and partisanship amongst voters.

The left is pointing their fingers at the right and using the flaws of the administration to promote their liberalism. Unfortunately, the actions of Congress have been largely consistent with many portions of the traditional liberal economic policy platform, so the right is pissed off, too.

My hope is that McCain has shown enough to the American people that they see him for what he is and not what they believe Bush is.

Once they do that, it comes down to traditional conservative policy vs. traditional liberal policy, and speaking solely in domestic economic terms, the traditional liberal policy is much closer to "more of the same" than the conservative policy.
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby BooyaCS » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:34 pm

The main issues I have with McCain (and I can still change my mind) are these.

1. We need to get out of Iraq. I felt we should have never been there and that a withdrawl over a 16 month period is a good thing.

2. Right now with the amount of money I am making I am getting more and more taken out for Taxes and Healthcare. The rising costs of Healthcare and taxes is turning my paycheck into a joke. I want to know what his plan is to lower taxes on people making UNDER 100k. Why? You lower taxes on those people then you allow them to grow into the upper tax brackets.

3. Right now we are in a Recession (seems like the whole 8 years we were) and I don't really care who is in office if they were able to get us out of it.

4. I am sick of the attack dog politics Yes I know dems and reps don't like eachother but can we tone it down please.

5. Censorship--Don't get me started as I feel it is the social conservatives driving more towards a 1920s society than 1 in 2008.

6. McCain's plan (at this point) seems weak and it seems like Palin doesn't bring anything to the table on policy (none that has been addressed at this point). Again oil is obsolete it has been for a while with the technology available to us we should have more alternatives out there.

7. Stay out of everyone's sex life. IE. Roe v Wade there shouldn't be any legislation in place when it comes to what 2 consenting adults choose to do. Not everyone is cut out to be a parent.
BooyaCS
 
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:54 pm

Unread postby CP » Fri Sep 05, 2008 2:47 pm

BooyaCS wrote:The main issues I have with McCain (and I can still change my mind) are these.

1. We need to get out of Iraq. I felt we should have never been there and that a withdrawl over a 16 month period is a good thing.


I don't know that either candidate actually has a different withdrawal timetable at this point. Yesterday Obama FINALLY acknowledged that the surge worked, and benchmarks are being met, so I think the ground forces are on their way out regardless. We will continue to have a presence there for some time regardless of who is elected president.

2. Right now with the amount of money I am making I am getting more and more taken out for Taxes and Healthcare. The rising costs of Healthcare and taxes is turning my paycheck into a joke. I want to know what his plan is to lower taxes on people making UNDER 100k. Why? You lower taxes on those people then you allow them to grow into the upper tax brackets.


He did talk yesterday about doubling the dependent exemption from $3500 to $7000. I don't believe that will do much for individuals making more than $200K a year and really seems targeted at middle-class families.

There will be an attempt to reduce taxes that are not personal income taxes. The left opposes these tax cuts, particularly the reduction of the corporate taxes, but I see it more as an incentive to keep them from moving operations off-shore and outside our borders.

4. I am sick of the attack dog politics Yes I know dems and reps don't like eachother but can we tone it down please.


That's going to be hard to stop, the campaigns can't or won't control the internet bloggers and unless and until the media stops using those bloggers as sources, both campaigns are going to have to respond in kind.

6. McCain's plan (at this point) seems weak and it seems like Palin doesn't bring anything to the table on policy (none that has been addressed at this point). Again oil is obsolete it has been for a while with the technology available to us we should have more alternatives out there.


Actually, Palin (as the Gov of Alaska) has a unique perspective on energy policy. She has had to deal with big oil more directly than any individual member of the federal government. If you think she's in bed with big oil, check out the news clippings with regard to that natural gas pipeline up there.

7. Stay out of everyone's sex life. IE. Roe v Wade there shouldn't be any legislation in place when it comes to what 2 consenting adults choose to do. Not everyone is cut out to be a parent.


Can't help you there... at the risk of igniting an entirely different debate, I don't see McCain and Palin preventing two consenting adults from having sex. It's killing what they believe is an innocent human life to which they object.
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Sep 05, 2008 3:20 pm

BooyaCS wrote:7. Stay out of everyone's sex life. IE. Roe v Wade there shouldn't be any legislation in place when it comes to what 2 consenting adults choose to do. Not everyone is cut out to be a parent.


No, not everyone is cut out to be a parent, but there is a multi-year waiting list when it comes to adoption.

You think just because someone is not fit to be a parent or because someone made a mistake that a child has no right to be born?

There are 40 million people in the United States that were not given a chance to live their lives because of this choice. They had no say in it at all.

And you know what those abortion arguments sound like? They sound like the arguments that people made 140 years ago and earlier, trying to make it appear that blacks were subhuman and not entitled to life. It was wrong when used to enslave a race of people and it's wrong when used to prevent a child from ever being born.

If two consenting adults want to have sex, fine. That's their business. But they should know about the consequences beforehand and not use abortion as the selfish act that it is. Our actions all have consequences and when you sleep with someone of the opposite sex, even with birth control, there's always the possibility that pregnancy might develop. My attitude is that if you can't deal with the possible consequence then you shouldn't do it.

I've worked with the Pregnancy Center of Pinellas County for a while down here and it's amazing the stories you hear. They do amazing work and do it right. Some pro-life groups just stop supporting the mother after they decide to keep the baby. Not this place. They offer support even if the woman decides to abort.

I've talked to many women who work with them, haunted by the abortions they received and knowing that there was a child they never got to know. The greatest supporters of abortion today are men in the 18-35 range. It's that attempt to shirk responsibility that's appealing.

So go ahead and have sex. Take precautions when you do it, but also realize the consequences that can result. Abortion has helped so many treat sexually relations so casually just so they can get themselves off. It's time for us to wake up and be serious adults on this subject, finding legitimate options that don't rob children of their lives.

http://www.pregctr.net/
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Fri Sep 05, 2008 3:53 pm

BooyaCS wrote:5. Censorship--Don't get me started as I feel it is the social conservatives driving more towards a 1920s society than 1 in 2008.


Which of course explains why the biggest bastions of censored speech in America are college campuses, which are dominated by leftists.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:31 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
BooyaCS wrote:5. Censorship--Don't get me started as I feel it is the social conservatives driving more towards a 1920s society than 1 in 2008.


Which of course explains why the biggest bastions of censored speech in America are college campuses, which are dominated by leftists.


Image
"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT
User avatar
Madre Hill, Superstar
Eternal Optimist
 
Posts: 4656
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:06 am
Location: Parma, OH
Favorite Player: The Playa
Least Favorite Player: The Game

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:35 pm

Truth hurt, Madre?
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Fri Sep 05, 2008 4:38 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:
BooyaCS wrote:5. Censorship--Don't get me started as I feel it is the social conservatives driving more towards a 1920s society than 1 in 2008.


Which of course explains why the biggest bastions of censored speech in America are college campuses, which are dominated by leftists.


Good point.

And one of the greatest periods of censorship in America happened during Woodrow Wilson's administration, an avowed lefty. FDR didn't have a particularly good record on it.

The censorship argument is one I don't get. I hear so many diatribes against Bush, see so many blogs against him (Huffington Post, Daily Kos), see a media that is pretty entrenched against him, and have seen many, many cars with nasty things about Bush and Cheney on them. This is censorship?

How many times have Jon Stewart, Conan O'Brien, or Jay Leno lampooned Bush? Do you live an imaginary world where no one says anything critical of Bush, the Republicans, or anything else? You clearly aren't living in reality if you believe the censorship crap.

Woodrow Wilson had opponents thrown into jail, similar to what John Adams did with the Alien and Sedition Acts. We've seen nothing like that, though one could argue that there has been some sedition going on and sedition is not protected under the Constitution.

It's amazing to me how many on the left want to paint this as the bleakest time in history and make believe that Bush is a dictator and a tyrant. Hey, he's done things that don't make me happy, but the man is far from a tyrant. Now Hugo Chavez, he's a tyrant. Fidel Castro is too. Vladimir Putin. You go live under them for a while like the average citizen in their country and you go ahead and speak up against them. It is then that'll you will pine for George W. Bush and his graciousness.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby BooyaCS » Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:21 pm

My view on censorship is rather controversial but I would like to see no censorship. Why? Well for 1 we have freedom of speech and press no where does it say you cannot offend someone or show something obscene. If you don't like it then don't watch, change the channel or block it.

However just because you (you in general here no one on the board just you as the society) don't like to hear swearing on Cable TV (btw it is a paid service) doesn't mean it should be removed all together.

Also Political Correctness (I HATE IT) with a passion of none other.

The Communications Decency Act.
The Parent Television Council
The FCC
The ACLU

I hate all of them.

Speaking of which I went to a Liberal Arts University in the middle of nowhere ohio. We really didn't have much censorship on campus and had some pretty liberal organizations.
BooyaCS
 
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:54 pm

Unread postby waborat » Fri Sep 05, 2008 6:17 pm

BooyaCS wrote:My view on censorship is rather controversial but I would like to see no censorship. Why? Well for 1 we have freedom of speech and press no where does it say you cannot offend someone or show something obscene. If you don't like it then don't watch, change the channel or block it.

However just because you (you in general here no one on the board just you as the society) don't like to hear swearing on Cable TV (btw it is a paid service) doesn't mean it should be removed all together.

Also Political Correctness (I HATE IT) with a passion of none other.

The Communications Decency Act.
The Parent Television Council
The FCC
The ACLU

I hate all of them.

Speaking of which I went to a Liberal Arts University in the middle of nowhere ohio. We really didn't have much censorship on campus and had some pretty liberal organizations.


You seem to forget that it was Mr Gore, his wife and their democratic friends who started up the PMRC in the mid 80's and wanted to get rid of all music that had sex, violence, satanic, etc lyrics in them...they, at least, came to their senses and now we only have these little stickers on our cd's and dvd's....the dems also went hard after tv shows like Married With Children in the late 80's (which is pretty tame compared to what's on nowadays)

Sorry, socialism & censorship are one and the same...conservatives just want you to use common sense on what's available to the youth in this country
User avatar
waborat
 
Posts: 4096
Joined: Thu Oct 25, 2007 5:04 pm
Location: Concord
Favorite Player: Megyn Kelly
Least Favorite Player: Single digit temps

Unread postby Stu » Fri Sep 05, 2008 9:30 pm

BooyaCS wrote:3. Right now we are in a Recession (seems like the whole 8 years we were) and I don't really care who is in office if they were able to get us out of it.


We are not in a recession.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Fri Sep 05, 2008 10:34 pm

HermanFontenot wrote:Truth hurt, Madre?

Seeing someone as smart as you fall for ressentiment bullshit like that hurts.
"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT
User avatar
Madre Hill, Superstar
Eternal Optimist
 
Posts: 4656
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:06 am
Location: Parma, OH
Favorite Player: The Playa
Least Favorite Player: The Game

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Fri Sep 05, 2008 10:44 pm

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:Truth hurt, Madre?

Seeing someone as smart as you fall for ressentiment bullshit like that hurts.


I don't resent it, Madre. It surprised me when I got to college: my parents were old '60s leftists and I kind of thought all leftists were gentle, guitar-strumming hippies like they and their friends. The anger and nastiness of college lefties caught me off guard. But it was what it was. It helped sharpen my own principles, clarify what I did and didn't believe in, so it did me a good service to be in that environment. So no, I don't resent it; didn't then, don't now. But the fact is, most universities are dominated politically by the left, and there is censorship, tacit and overt, that comes from that direction. I don't think I'm saying anything terribly controversial here.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Unread postby jfiling » Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:13 pm

BooyaCS wrote:My view on censorship is rather controversial but I would like to see no censorship. Why? Well for 1 we have freedom of speech and press no where does it say you cannot offend someone or show something obscene. If you don't like it then don't watch, change the channel or block it.

However just because you (you in general here no one on the board just you as the society) don't like to hear swearing on Cable TV (btw it is a paid service) doesn't mean it should be removed all together.

Also Political Correctness (I HATE IT) with a passion of none other.

The Communications Decency Act.
The Parent Television Council
The FCC
The ACLU

I hate all of them.

Speaking of which I went to a Liberal Arts University in the middle of nowhere ohio. We really didn't have much censorship on campus and had some pretty liberal organizations.


I agree with you on (almost) all of those. That's why I am a small-l libertarian. There is no consistent attack on any of that crap among the big 2 parties.

My almost is due to my moderate admiration for the ACLU. The problem with them is the good work they do is ignored by the media, and it seems to be the distasteful cases they undertake that get the most attention.
jfiling
Old School Writer
 
Posts: 3874
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 7:14 pm
Location: Akron, Ohio
Favorite Player: Silky Johnston
Least Favorite Player: Buck Nasty

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:34 am

BooyaCS wrote:However just because you (you in general here no one on the board just you as the society) don't like to hear swearing on Cable TV (btw it is a paid service) doesn't mean it should be removed all together.

Also Political Correctness (I HATE IT) with a passion of none other.

The Communications Decency Act.
The Parent Television Council
The FCC
The ACLU

I hate all of them.

Speaking of which I went to a Liberal Arts University in the middle of nowhere ohio. We really didn't have much censorship on campus and had some pretty liberal organizations.


I don't hate the FCC completely. I do like the fact that they make sure that there's no hijacking of frequencies, etc. There needs to be some sanity there and I do think that there should be some public decency standards over the airwaves. I do think that the FCC is too hot and heavy in many cases.

Now, the PTC is hit and miss with me. If they want to fight for standards and get people to stop watching TV or whatever for lax standards then I have no problem. The lobbying aspect the get heavy duty regulation is not what they should be doing. The concentration should be on the more difficult task of winning over viewers to their side. If a TV network can't get anyone to watch a profane show and can't get advertisers then they won't air it. It's more difficult to do it that way but it is the right way to go about it.

The ACLU does both good and bad things. They don't equally represent interests and sometimes focus on people outside the mainstream so much that they don't fight for people who are being discriminated against for having more traditional beliefs.

As for the censorship of campuses, I have seen it on several campuses. The censorship is often against more conservative and traditional beliefs.

There was an issue a few years ago where Campus Crusade for Christ was banned from the UF campus along with all other evangelical Christian orgs for no other reason than they were Christian orgs. At the same time they allowed atheist, Muslim, Buddhist, and other orgs similar to recruit and essentially evangelize on campus. There was a complaint and it was reversed after several alumni threatened to withhold funds.

It's also happened in other instances. There have been a few left wing issues of censorship, but most I've seen have been for more conservative causes from refusing to allow space for College Republicans when the College Dems are granted space despite there being an equal number of members in both groups.

It is just how many left wingers operate. I don't have as big of a problem with a private university, liberal or conservative, doing it, but a fully public university is different.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby idoctribefan » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:56 am

HermanFontenot wrote:
Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:Truth hurt, Madre?

Seeing someone as smart as you fall for ressentiment bullshit like that hurts.


I don't resent it, Madre. It surprised me when I got to college: my parents were old '60s leftists and I kind of thought all leftists were gentle, guitar-strumming hippies like they and their friends. The anger and nastiness of college lefties caught me off guard. But it was what it was. It helped sharpen my own principles, clarify what I did and didn't believe in, so it did me a good service to be in that environment. So no, I don't resent it; didn't then, don't now. But the fact is, most universities are dominated politically by the left, and there is censorship, tacit and overt, that comes from that direction. I don't think I'm saying anything terribly controversial here.


To deny that a majority of college campuses are liberal ideological breeding grounds is naive.
"And three of the better guys in franchise history, Daugherty, Z and now Kyrie could get hurt in a rubber room full of cotton balls." - Leadpipe
User avatar
idoctribefan
 
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Joe Haden
Least Favorite Player: #6

Unread postby idoctribefan » Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:01 am

Stu wrote:
BooyaCS wrote:3. Right now we are in a Recession (seems like the whole 8 years we were) and I don't really care who is in office if they were able to get us out of it.


We are not in a recession.


That's right, Stu. A recession is defined as two consecutive quarters of GDP drop. We have not had one quarter. GDP went up 1% in the 1st quarter and 1.3% 2nd quarter of this year.
"And three of the better guys in franchise history, Daugherty, Z and now Kyrie could get hurt in a rubber room full of cotton balls." - Leadpipe
User avatar
idoctribefan
 
Posts: 1218
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Joe Haden
Least Favorite Player: #6

Unread postby Madre Hill, Superstar » Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:06 am

HermanFontenot wrote:I don't resent it, Madre. It surprised me when I got to college: my parents were old '60s leftists and I kind of thought all leftists were gentle, guitar-strumming hippies like they and their friends. The anger and nastiness of college lefties caught me off guard. But it was what it was. It helped sharpen my own principles, clarify what I did and didn't believe in, so it did me a good service to be in that environment. So no, I don't resent it; didn't then, don't now. But the fact is, most universities are dominated politically by the left, and there is censorship, tacit and overt, that comes from that direction. I don't think I'm saying anything terribly controversial here.


Well, my college experience was a complete 180: I went to a private Catholic institution run by Marianist monks and came out a liberal. I never caught wind of any censorship at UD: It would've been a surprise to our College Republicans.

Differing experiences shape up differing views, I guess. I'll take back my last post.
"The fucking Who...... If I want to watch old people run around ill go set fire to a nursing home." - CDT
User avatar
Madre Hill, Superstar
Eternal Optimist
 
Posts: 4656
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:06 am
Location: Parma, OH
Favorite Player: The Playa
Least Favorite Player: The Game

Unread postby hermanfontenot » Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:04 am

Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:I don't resent it, Madre. It surprised me when I got to college: my parents were old '60s leftists and I kind of thought all leftists were gentle, guitar-strumming hippies like they and their friends. The anger and nastiness of college lefties caught me off guard. But it was what it was. It helped sharpen my own principles, clarify what I did and didn't believe in, so it did me a good service to be in that environment. So no, I don't resent it; didn't then, don't now. But the fact is, most universities are dominated politically by the left, and there is censorship, tacit and overt, that comes from that direction. I don't think I'm saying anything terribly controversial here.


Well, my college experience was a complete 180: I went to a private Catholic institution run by Marianist monks and came out a liberal. I never caught wind of any censorship at UD: It would've been a surprise to our College Republicans.

Differing experiences shape up differing views, I guess. I'll take back my last post.


I went to Kent. Hardly a bastion of leftism on the order of Cal or Cornell, but still, it was an eye-opener.
User avatar
hermanfontenot
History Buff
 
Posts: 4117
Joined: Wed Feb 14, 2007 10:52 am
Location: NE Ohio
Favorite Player: Big Z
Least Favorite Player: Jose Mesa

Unread postby FUDU » Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:49 am

Hell even spending a little bit of time attending CSU you can see feel the left leanings. It certainly was more apparent in a small specific group of subjects and classes but present none the less.

Higher education thrives on liberal POVs and ideology.
Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect.
"I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

2011 TCF Stratomatic Champ
User avatar
FUDU
 
Posts: 13356
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 2:02 am
Favorite Player: Me
Least Favorite Player: You

Unread postby skatingtripods » Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:54 am

idoctribefan wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:
Madre Hill, Superstar wrote:
HermanFontenot wrote:Truth hurt, Madre?

Seeing someone as smart as you fall for ressentiment bullshit like that hurts.


I don't resent it, Madre. It surprised me when I got to college: my parents were old '60s leftists and I kind of thought all leftists were gentle, guitar-strumming hippies like they and their friends. The anger and nastiness of college lefties caught me off guard. But it was what it was. It helped sharpen my own principles, clarify what I did and didn't believe in, so it did me a good service to be in that environment. So no, I don't resent it; didn't then, don't now. But the fact is, most universities are dominated politically by the left, and there is censorship, tacit and overt, that comes from that direction. I don't think I'm saying anything terribly controversial here.


To deny that a majority of college campuses are liberal ideological breeding grounds is naive.


I was thumbing through some books at Borders yesterday and came upon "Conservative Responses To Liberal Lies", which looked like a great read and something I'd have gotten if I wasn't spending money traveling today. The lie: College campuses are not liberally biased. Fact: 90% of college professors said they vote Democrat or are to the left ideologically.

It was a book in A-Z format and that chapter was Kids: The Indoctrination of our Children from Leftists.

It also addressed the media, saying that 87% of them vote liberal.
A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe
User avatar
skatingtripods
Sloth Duncan
 
Posts: 14346
Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 12:27 pm
Location: Cleveland
Favorite Player: Mike Aviles
Least Favorite Player: Every Detroit Tiger

Unread postby Stu » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:42 pm

FUDU wrote:Hell even spending a little bit of time attending CSU you can see feel the left leanings. It certainly was more apparent in a small specific group of subjects and classes but present none the less.

Higher education thrives on liberal POVs and ideology.


As an undergrad and now a grad student at CSU, I would have to say the majority of my professors were left leaning.

In Math and Science classes it didnt come up.

History and gen ed classes were extremely liberal. My professor for one of my Urban Studies classes was formerly employed in Mike White's administration, and brought not only Mike White but also Frank Jackson to speak to our class. My US History professor was a member of the United States Communist Party.

- Funny story about Frank Jackson. When he came to speak to our class, my wife (then girlfriend) had to explain to him the basic economic theory of the invisible hand. He had 0 understanding of basic economics, and he is continuing to make that clear in his decision making as Mayor of Cleveland.

Right now I am getting my MBA in Health Care Administration. Thus far my Health Care classes have been populated by students believing in full universal coverage at the tax payers expense. I can name only 3 other students that I have met that have actually spoken up and said a free market health care system could still work. I've had two health care policy courses thus far and both were taught by those who believed in socialized medicine.

I even got into an argument with one of my professors regarding socialized medicine vs our current "free market." he was claiming that our "free market" system is failing, and while I agreed that our system was broken, I explained that it is not a free market. When you have government providing medical coverage for approximately 50% of the population, it is not a free market. When the government pays for OVER 50% of health care dollars, it is not a free market. When you have restrictions on the market put in place by congress that limits the types of insurance offerings there are in the market, it is not a free market.

He didn't get it though, and he's teaching in a business school. :roll :roll:
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Unread postby Stu » Sat Sep 06, 2008 12:52 pm

back on topic:

Image
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:51 pm

Greta on Fox News is in the middle of a special tonight. Sarah Palin: American Woman.

Really enjoyable watching this and seeing how similar her family is to how I remember growing up with two parents working, my mom being the biggest bread winner in the family. They remind me of so many other families that I've known over the years. Just so real and down to earth.

What a breath of fresh air.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby CP » Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:55 pm

Mr. MacPhisto wrote:Greta on Fox News is in the middle of a special tonight. Sarah Palin: American Woman.

Really enjoyable watching this and seeing how similar her family is to how I remember growing up with two parents working, my mom being the biggest bread winner in the family. They remind me of so many other families that I've known over the years. Just so real and down to earth.

What a breath of fresh air.


In other news, Gallup has a 3 point McCain lead in today's poll and Rasmussen has them tied...
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sun Sep 07, 2008 9:01 pm

CP wrote:
In other news, Gallup has a 3 point McCain lead in today's poll and Rasmussen has them tied...


The Gallup has a huge sample size as well, though it does not yet fully account for McCain's speech. The full impact of that on the polling will not be known until tomorrow.

The three point lead for McCain in Gallup is currently outside the margin of error.

There are also growing rumblings that the Palin smears are coming from Obama's campaign through their surrogates. The Daily Kos, Andrew Sullivan, MoveOn.org, etc do not want to share their sources and have no one up in Alaska snooping around. Obama does have people up there.

If there is any evidence to tie his campaign to the smears then he's got a serious problem. Much polling suggests that many are already tying it to him because they believe the media is in his pocket and that he's using them for any hit pieces he can get.

The entrenched media has been yelled at as they've followed Palin by ordinary Americans asking them to tell the truth and be fair. There is a growing backlash against them and I have to wonder if they will turn around and focus on Obama and his questionable record and ties in order to try to regain any credibility.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby Mr. MacPhisto » Sun Sep 07, 2008 9:27 pm

Didn't have to wait until Monday morning. The new USA Today/Gallup poll is out and covers Thursday-Sunday.

McCain trailed by seven before the start of the convention amongst registered voters. He now has a 50-46 advantage.

The big number is really amongst those identified as likely voters. McCain has a 10 point lead, 54-44, in that category.

Republicans running across the country now also are viewed more favorably and it appears that races may be tightening up. Some of the data I've been looking at shows that the GOP taking back the House is a very real possibility. I don't think that will happen in the Senate unless I get a surprise, mainly because the GOP has to defend so many seats. There are still strong pick up prospects in New Jersey and Louisiana. Jindal's performance in LA may help there and Lautenberg is beset by scandal. That said, Ted Stevens should be voted out in AK. If the GOP could pick up one net seat, a tough task, then they'd take the Senate as well if they win the Presidency.

The enthusiasm gap between Democrats and Republicans is closing. The GOP is no longer demoralized and the base is charged. If Biden and Obama perform poorly in debates it could also reduce that gap or completely eliminate it.
Mr. MacPhisto
Troll
 
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:39 pm
Location: Tampa, FL
Favorite Player: LeBron James
Least Favorite Player: A.J. Pierzynski

Unread postby WarAdmiral » Mon Sep 08, 2008 12:37 am

It's over. I got an email from my aunt, who is very, very conservative. They have Obama admitting he is a Muslim. I can't believe it, but I seen it with my own eyes, and doesn't look like it was a camera trick.

I had convinced her a couple of months ago that he was of Christian faith, and now she is rubbing it in, that she was right, and I was wrong. I give up. Gonna pick up hunting, and maybe start a church.
User avatar
WarAdmiral
 
Posts: 603
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 3:35 am
Location: Mantua, oh

Unread postby Stu » Mon Sep 08, 2008 6:10 am

Mr. MacPhisto wrote:Didn't have to wait until Monday morning. The new USA Today/Gallup poll is out and covers Thursday-Sunday.

McCain trailed by seven before the start of the convention amongst registered voters. He now has a 50-46 advantage.


A 50-46 lead is just a convention bump. By the end of next week it should be dead even. But McCain has successfully narrowed the gap to even things up.
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

Unread postby CP » Mon Sep 08, 2008 7:58 am

Stu wrote:
Mr. MacPhisto wrote:Didn't have to wait until Monday morning. The new USA Today/Gallup poll is out and covers Thursday-Sunday.

McCain trailed by seven before the start of the convention amongst registered voters. He now has a 50-46 advantage.


A 50-46 lead is just a convention bump. By the end of next week it should be dead even. But McCain has successfully narrowed the gap to even things up.


The 50-46 number isn't the right number, that's only amongst registered voters. More telling is the 54-44 number amongst likely voters, particularly with the Obama enthusiasm nationwide waning. Due to his primary fight with Hillary, he had to mobilize his voting base earlier than a candidate would have wanted, and between now and Nov. 4, he will pay for it. All the poll numbers should that younger voters are becoming more disinterested and older voters are just now getting engaged in the election season.
User avatar
CP
 
Posts: 1529
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:44 am
Location: Stow, Ohio
Favorite Player: Bernie Kosar
Least Favorite Player: Colt McCoy

Unread postby Stu » Mon Sep 08, 2008 8:15 am

either way, doesnt matter. its a convention bump. obama got one, not mccain got his. it will even up prior to the debates (unless something outrageous happens).
Stu
 
Posts: 1642
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 2:15 pm
Favorite Player: Eric Wedge
Least Favorite Player: Swerb

PreviousNext

Return to No Holds Barred

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: gbot and 2 guests

Who is online

In total there are 3 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 2 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 181 on Sat Feb 16, 2013 4:50 pm

Users browsing this forum: gbot and 2 guests