Nimue1995 1 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Like I said - 45-50% max for Obama... He cant get over that hump... He should be running away with thisDo a little research and let me know the last presidential candidate that polled above 50% at the end of September before the election. Hasn't happened in a LONG time. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I don't think you really read anything more than you want to. I said that whatever was giving her such high approval ratings in Alaska wasn't coming through in the interviews. And unfortunately for you all, results aren't as likely to be seen by the American public as interviews on TV.I responded to that, but Ill spell it out for you since you apparently have trouble connecting the dots.Many factors go into someones perception of a candidate. Results, debates, personal appearances and interviews. What comes through in interviews is only one part of her chances of helping the ticket. Her popularity is indicative of her results, another, and for thinking people, the most important factor.Got it? Link to post Share on other sites
vbnautilus 48 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 ROFL. saking into account the Bradley effect in the swing states all of which are closer than the national polls, this race is a dead heat right now. You might not have heard that in post debate/post bail out polls JSM has even closed the national gap by a couple of points.Allright let's not overstate the so-called Bradley effect. First, there's no data on how this applies to a presidential election and there's really no way to predict if it will happen at all. Second, examinations from the primaries this year actually showed a "reverse" Bradley effect in some states for Obama. Polls have all sorts of inaccuracies for sure, but you can't just tack on free points for McCain because you think you can estimate a complex source of bias like this. Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Do a little research and let me know the last presidential candidate that polled above 50% at the end of September before the election. Hasn't happened in a LONG time.Let me know the last black candidate in a statewide or higher election that finished near his polling results. Hasnt happened, ever. Link to post Share on other sites
FCP Bob 1,312 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I have a question for Daniel.Daniel (or anyone else), if republicans totally sold out this election (or whatever democratic talking point/buzzword) by choosing Palin - a fucking woman - than answer me this.Did democrats sell out in the same way by nominating a black man? Do you see why this question can't really be asked of you?And don't worry. The same racial overtones you're upset by right now are the same ones I feel when you criticize Palin for being a woman (or inexperienced, or unqualified, or whatever stupid reasoning you use). Please explain to me where I'm wrong here.Something that is totally different between Obama and Palin is the main difference in how the Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates are nominated. One is elected where a high percentage of US voters are given an opportunity to say yay or nay while the other is appointed.In a democracy if somebody wins an election then they deserve whatever position they have attained whether they are the best person for the job or not. When somebody is appointed it's a totally different matter and the reality is that at no time in the political process is a Vice President really ever voted for by the electorate. Palin deserves to be the Governor of Alaska since she won an election fair and square but it's totally fair game to question her qualifications to be the Vice President since it's a position that is not truly democratically elected but is basically a patronage appointment.All the pros and cons of Palin have been mentioned numerous times so I'm not going to get into them again but does anybody reasonably think that she could currently win any nationwide election in the US ? Link to post Share on other sites
85suited 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Do a little research and let me know the last presidential candidate that polled above 50% at the end of September before the election. Hasn't happened in a LONG time.my comment was simple...8 years of Republican RuleUnpopular warfinancial crisisthis should be 60 - 40.... Link to post Share on other sites
copernicus 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Something that is totally different between Obama and Palin is the main difference in how the Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates are nominated. One is elected where a high percentage of US voters are given an opportunity to say yay or nay while the other is appointed. Appointed is somewhat misleading here. The POTUS nominee is heavily influenced by the delegates that elected him.In a democracy if somebody wins an election then they deserve whatever position they have attained whether they are the best person for the job or not. An interesting factoid. Irrelevant though, since we arent a democracy, we're a representative republic. Link to post Share on other sites
Nimue1995 1 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I responded to that, but Ill spell it out for you since you apparently have trouble connecting the dots.Many factors go into someones perception of a candidate. Results, debates, personal appearances and interviews. What comes through in interviews is only one part of her chances of helping the ticket. Her popularity is indicative of her results, another, and for thinking people, the most important factor.Got it?And this is where you get into trouble. Believing all those "undecided" voters out there are actually thinking. A good portion of them are either the ones watching Cops or the ones featured the show.Edit: I imagine this could give me that elitist title again. But it's more simple observation on my part. After all I had to try to explain the Wall Street "Rescue" to my husband because he couldn't be bothered to watch even the evening news about it. And there are more people like him than "thinking" people. Link to post Share on other sites
85suited 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 And this is where you get into trouble. Believing all those "undecided" voters out there are actually thinking. A good portion of them are either the ones watching Cops or the ones featured the show.you are right, BHO Campaign and acorn are busy combing homeless shelters looking for people to register to vote and then tell them who to vote for...If the McCain Campaign drove a big RV thru the south registering voters... there were be an uproar Link to post Share on other sites
flyingdonkey 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Now look at the prior ones. Closing requires two, remember? CNN reported that he closed 2 points in the last 3 days. If CNN is wrong, my bad. http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/...hanged-nothing/ Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,752 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 If the base had a choice between McCain Romney or Obama Biden, while they might not like the choice, they'd still choose McCain IMO. I don't think it was necessary to excite a base that wasn't going the other way. I just don't see them voting for Obama, especially when their pastors are illegally telling them not to vote for Obama. It's not illegal, come one dude. They would just lose their tax exempt status. Why do you talk like this? It just causes arguments since you are clearly lying to make it sound as bad as possible.I didn't make this up. The IRS is investigating several churches who are openly endorsing a candidate while at the same time getting tax breaks. It was a big story on CNN. They are not allowed to legally get those tax breaks if they sway their members politically. I didn't make this stuff up guys, look into it and you'll see that the IRS is taking a hard stance on it.You must not have paid attention to this "big story" at all, because the pastors are doing this to FORCE the IRS to take action against them so that they can sue the IRS.The problem is that if only executive experience counts (which I do not buy at all) then you are basically saying that John McCain has no relevant experience either. Although, this is a good example of why people say Senators make terrible Presidential candidates. Unfortunately for Palin, Dan Quayle proved that morons make bad vice presidents. huh? What is something that Quayle did badly while vice president? Also, Dan Quayle is crazy smart.Something that is totally different between Obama and Palin is the main difference in how the Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates are nominated. One is elected where a high percentage of US voters are given an opportunity to say yay or nay while the other is appointed.In a democracy if somebody wins an election then they deserve whatever position they have attained whether they are the best person for the job or not. When somebody is appointed it's a totally different matter and the reality is that at no time in the political process is a Vice President really ever voted for by the electorate. Palin deserves to be the Governor of Alaska since she won an election fair and square but it's totally fair game to question her qualifications to be the Vice President since it's a position that is not truly democratically elected but is basically a patronage appointment.All the pros and cons of Palin have been mentioned numerous times so I'm not going to get into them again but does anybody reasonably think that she could currently win any nationwide election in the US ? Of course not, what does that have to do with anything? After 4 years of being VP I think her chances would be MORE than reasonable. Link to post Share on other sites
timwakefield 68 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I don't recall ever saying anything that you're accusing me of here with Palin. I'd be happy to admit I am wrong if you show me, but I doubt it.I also don't recall saying its stupid to criticize her experience. Everything should be questioned that matters. I'm just saying her sex doesn't matter. That's all. I think you might have either misunderstood me or lumped me in with people like 85suited, etc. Not a big deal. when you criticize Palin for being a woman (or inexperienced, or unqualified, or whatever stupid reasoning you use).Bad short-term memory imo. Now happily admit you were wrong. HAPPILY!!!! Link to post Share on other sites
El Guapo 8 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 You didnt prove shit. Anytime you want to debate on issues and not your weak sense of humor, try it. You never have, and I doubt youre capable.Ummmmmm. Loogie is pretty funny. In fact, he is really funny, and a fantastic singer. It's not illegal, come one dude. They would just lose their tax exempt status. Why do you talk like this? It just causes arguments since you are clearly lying to make it sound as bad as possible.I thought the exact same thing, but I think I forgot to type it.huh? What is something that Quayle did badly while vice president? Also, Dan Quayle is crazy smart.FYP Link to post Share on other sites
nutzbuster 7 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Ummmmmm. Loogie is pretty funny. In fact, he is really funny, and a fantastic singer.Rumor is he's gay. Well....not actually gay gay, but more slightly effeminate? (edit: for those who didn't get the joke...http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseacti...ideoid=41232984 ) Link to post Share on other sites
doublemeup 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 All you Republicans who love Palin so much just answer me thisIf Palin was running against Obama for President, would you vote for her? Link to post Share on other sites
brvheart 1,752 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 All you Republicans who love Palin so much just answer me thisIf Palin was running against Obama for President, would you vote for her?She wouldn't have been nominated so it's irrelevant. Also, I don't think anyone here loves Palin too much, she's just the only republican running. We don't like Obama or McCain, since they are both liberals. (Just to different degrees.) Link to post Share on other sites
Balloon guy 158 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 All you Republicans who love Palin so much just answer me thisIf Palin was running against Obama for President, would you vote for her?Biden did run for your side's nomination, he lost.Yet his real failure is irrelevant, while Palin's supposed failure is relevant to you.Which makes your question kind of..lame Link to post Share on other sites
KramitDaToad 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 my comment was simple...8 years of Republican RuleUnpopular warfinancial crisisthis should be 60 - 40....It might actually be closer to that if McCain was black.Just saying Link to post Share on other sites
doublemeup 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 She wouldn't have been nominated so it's irrelevant. Also, I don't think anyone here loves Palin too much, she's just the only republican running. We don't like Obama or McCain, since they are both liberals. (Just to different degrees.) Biden did run for your side's nomination, he lost.Yet his real failure is irrelevant, while Palin's supposed failure is relevant to you.Which makes your question kind of..lameOk so since you took a yes or no question and didn't answer, I'll take that as a no.The question isn't irrelevant and what failure of Palin did I mention? It's a very real possibility that if McCain is elected, he won't make it through the 4 years so that means it's President Palin (God that's scary) running the country. So seeing theres a very real chance that if your candidate is elected that Palin will become President who would you feel more comfortable running the country. Obama or Palin? Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Ok so since you took a yes or no question and didn't answer, I'll take that as a no.The question isn't irrelevant and what failure of Palin did I mention? It's a very real possibility that if McCain is elected, he won't make it through the 4 years so that means it's President Palin (God that's scary) running the country. So seeing theres a very real chance that if your candidate is elected that Palin will become President who would you feel more comfortable running the country. Obama or Palin?What cracks me up is that the people looking for a reason to vote against McCain/Palin actually think this is reasonable. Link to post Share on other sites
Pot Odds RAC 23 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 And this is where you get into trouble. Believing all those "undecided" voters out there are actually thinking. A good portion of them are either the ones watching Cops or the ones featured the show.Edit: I imagine this could give me that elitist title again. But it's more simple observation on my part. After all I had to try to explain the Wall Street "Rescue" to my husband because he couldn't be bothered to watch even the evening news about it. And there are more people like him than "thinking" people.Confirms that you must be a real joy to be around. Link to post Share on other sites
akoff 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 All you Republicans who love Palin so much just answer me thisIf Palin was running against Obama for President, would you vote for her?1. It is not a matter of love. 2.She has experience that BHO doesn’t have….that would be a little as compared BHO’s none. In this hypothetical poorly thought question that isn’t relevant to any logical thought process….I would vote for her first. I would for most anyone first. I would vote for Hillary, Al Gore, Nancy P, Joe B or any of the others… My reason is that BHO is dangerous. He might be smooth enough to get this done. He has risen to this level with no substance, the worst voting record in the entire congress and his public speaking skills. The above mentioned names are harmless, the reason BHO is here is because they can’t get out of their own way. That is also the reason this guy whose biggest accomplishment is speaking well is nominated for President. The fact that BHO is where he is just confirms my thought that people really are that stupid. They are willing to believe what they want to hear regardless of what they know is true. It is why scam artists in business always find the next sucker…people really are that stupid. I have sat in meetings for marketing plans where I have actually said out loud to my staff “people aren’t this stupid” only to proven wrong. You know what vote him, the US will lose, the middle class will lose the most, the poor the next and the rich will just sit around and bitch about it. At the end of the day you are going to be paid you less, worked you more, watch more jobs go overseas, given less benefits….and then it will be what a bad company you all work for. What will the reason be? The reason will be that company isn’t making the money it needs to support all the things you seem to feel entitlement for. They cost money folks and if you are stupid enough to believe that business is going to pay for it and you are not going to be touched….well then I guess it goes back to “people really are that stupid.” Link to post Share on other sites
akoff 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 Something that is totally different between Obama and Palin is the main difference in how the Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates are nominated. One is elected where a high percentage of US voters are given an opportunity to say yay or nay while the other is appointed.In a democracy if somebody wins an election then they deserve whatever position they have attained whether they are the best person for the job or not. When somebody is appointed it's a totally different matter and the reality is that at no time in the political process is a Vice President really ever voted for by the electorate. Palin deserves to be the Governor of Alaska since she won an election fair and square but it's totally fair game to question her qualifications to be the Vice President since it's a position that is not truly democratically elected but is basically a patronage appointment.All the pros and cons of Palin have been mentioned numerous times so I'm not going to get into them again but does anybody reasonably think that she could currently win any nationwide election in the US ?I hate to nitpick Bob but I am pretty sure this is a Republic...just sayin. Link to post Share on other sites
KramitDaToad 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I hate to nitpick Bob but I am pretty sure this was a RepublicFYPUSSA **** Yeah! Link to post Share on other sites
85suited 0 Posted October 1, 2008 Share Posted October 1, 2008 I found this nice little excerpt... This pretty much sums up why I am not a fan of liberalismAmericans have come to expect that no matter what they do, no matter what decisions they make, their government will be there in their time of need. Our society is rapidly moving from one of independence to one of dependence, a trend that has continued to gain momentum since New Deal programs designed to help us overcome the Great Depression were first introduced by President Roosevelt. Today, our elected representatives in the House and the Senate feed this entitlement mentality by continually funneling federal tax revenues to their home states and districts in order to secure their political futures. Politicians contribute to the “something for nothing” mentality so that they can maintain their grip on power by demonstrating to their constituents their ability to produce entitlements and benefits from Washington. What ever happened to personal responsibility? When did we as Americans choose to stop making things happen for ourselves and begin to count on our government to provide for us? This country was built by men and women who stood up on their own and created opportunities for themselves. It was not built by people waiting for the U.S. government to save them from their own decisions or provide for them at every turn. The entitlement mentality is gripping America and destroying the fabric of our society. Too many citizens expect their elected officials to solve all their problems and provide for their every need. Until we as a country begin to hold people accountable for their decisions and their actions, the entitlement mentality will continue to dominate our thinking and our society will continue to expect our government to give them something for nothing. byGreg Reeson Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now