This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

Democrats and Double Standards

Obama's not-so-secret weapon: the media.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Publ...15/586pbxqj.asp

The Weekly Standard is a Republican publication, I think this is a biased post. :lol:

I thought the original Obama Girls on YouTube were hilarious.

I also think race will be a factor in this election. Paul Sniderman's experiment and survey pretty much backed up what everyone already knew. People have mentioned the Bradley Effect. That is what it is all about.

The Weekly Standard is a Republican publication, I think this is a biased post. :lol:

Jess, I've finally come to realize that EVERY post here is a biased one. I've got to work hard now to keep up with ya'll...

Jess, I've finally come to realize that EVERY post here is a biased one. I've got to work hard now to keep up with ya'll...

Yes they are biased!! :lol: Everybody gets to have an opinion. It's not a newspaper. All my posts are my opinion and that means 99 percent of the time, they represent my biases. I'm for Obama.

Edited September 22, 200817 yr by Jess

Yes they are biased!! :lol: Everybody gets to have an opinion. It's not a newspaper. All my posts are my opinion and that means 99 percent of the time, they represent my biases. I'm for Obama.

You go girl!

Wow! 60,000! Good for her...That almost matches Obama's acceptance speech/concert!

This almost made me laugh. I guess you just can't help yourself....I thought you were all about issues but now you're happy that your candidate can draw a crowd...yay she's a celebrity now.

Obama/Biden having a voting record for increasing taxes is apparently something the McCain camp has contrived in order to mislead...(according to Roman's article)

No, the record hasn't been contrived.....McCain's reporting of it is misleading. That's what politicians do. I'm sure Obama is misleading at times so are you saying that McCain is never misleading?

The recent events that have taken place on Wall Street are exactly what the Dems have been waiting for to excuse their ambition of increased regulation, government mandates, and government control.

The free market is not perfect, but it will certainly be better off without being under the boot of the federal government

Me too....I think the Democrats have been hoping for the market to crash so they can be all full of glee about how they can fix it. Too bad if you really believe something like that....I know a member of McCain's campaign staff suggested that a terrorist attack or something of the sort would benefit McCain but I haven't heard that the Democrats said that it would be great if the market fell apart so we could pump another $700 billion plus into the ever growing deficit just to be able to implement more regulation.

That's a pretty pathetic reach. I could see if you said that the Democrats will use this situation as a reason for implementing regulation but saying that they have been waiting for it shows how much contempt you have for Democrats. You make them sound like like extremely heartess people....and you shake your head at my silliness.

I think this week is an example of a market failure. I think something needs to happen with regulation. I don't know if we need more of it, or to enforce the regulations we have.

I'm not real hot on a trillion dollar bailout, but it is better than the alternative. I believe Bush and his folks when they say this would have led to a Depression. I don't think the Fed and the Treasury are huge proponent of needless regulation.

I think, as a taxpayer, since we are being made to bail the greedy bastards out, there ought to be something for us in return. Perhaps, the federal government could require credit companies to lower their interest rates to a reasonable level --I think any credit card company can make a handsome profit charging at most prime * 2. And, the government should put a cap on their finance charges. This would discourage predatory practices on consumers. The market system can't work when incentives encourage predatory practices.

Our problem is a credit problem -- we are too far in debt. Right now the United States has a negative savings balance. That's not good. Consumers owe more than they save.

I also think the federal government should change the bankruptcy code to its previous level. That would provide mortgage companies less of an incentive to give out this ridiculous mortgages to people who are too poor to pay their mortgages and too stupid to realize they are being scammed. If a person can go bankrupt -- and then protect their home from foreclosure -- the greedy companies would have no incentive to play the odds and issue mortgages to people who don't stand much of a chance of being able to meet the payments.

Right now, I think our mortgage system is so screwed up the house prices are incredibly inflated and people are in homes who never should have bought that high priced a residence, and frankly don't need one. JMO.

This almost made me laugh. I guess you just can't help yourself....I thought you were all about issues but now you're happy that your candidate can draw a crowd...yay she's a celebrity now.

Speaking of "issues"...

Dems seize on McCain's 13 cars

(CNN) — Democrats eager to portray John McCain as out of touch with average Americans and as a flip-flopper seized on a report Sunday the Arizona senator and his wife, Cindy, own more than a dozen cars — including several foreign-made automobiles.

A Newsweek article published on the magazine's Web Site Sunday said registration records show the McCains currently own 13 cars — two of which are foreign-made: a Honda and a Volkswagen. That appears to contradict the Republican presidential nominee's past statements he only buys cars made in America. (Cindy McCain also drives a Lexus and daughter Meghan owns a Toyota Prius, but neither are registered to the McCains.)

Newsweek also reported Barack Obama owns one car: a Ford Escape Hybrid.

----------------------------------------

I wonder why it's okay for Hollywood types, like Jay Leno, to have a collection of automobiles, but not the McCain's.

I'm happy for Barack that he owns a Ford Escape Hybrid. I'm sure that offsets the fuel consumption of his campaign plane...

I think this week is an example of a market failure. I think something needs to happen with regulation. I don't know if we need more of it, or to enforce the regulations we have.

Jess, do you think it was a mistake for the Clinton Administration to pressure lenders to make risky loans?

The liberal Village Voice previously chronicled how Clinton Administration housing secretary Andrew Cuomo helped spawn the mortgage crisis through his pressure on lenders to promote affordable housing and diversity. “Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments.

http://www.openmarket.org/2008/09/16/clint...tgage-meltdown/

Me and Wales should get together here in California and volunteer at the local GOP office...

Palin energizes California Republicans

Post-convention swing state polls are tipping toward Sen. John McCain, the TV pundits are waxing about "The Palin Factor," and Sen. Barack Obama's California supporters are freaking out about a race Democrats were uncommonly confident about only a month ago.

Conversely, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's addition to the GOP ticket jolted Northern California Republicans out of what one described as their "Underground Railroad" existence in one of the nation's most liberal regions.

Despite generating all this fear and enthusiasm, the Palin Factor hasn't changed the race in California. Obama beats McCain 52 percent to 36 percent in a Field Poll released last week, and neither campaign is broadcasting ads in the state's expensive television markets. On Thursday, Palin canceled her rally and fundraising visit to the state planned for this week.

But Republicans aren't giving up on California. California Republican Party chief operating officer Bill Christiansen said some private polls put the two candidates within five points of each other, and the McCain campaign is staffing 50 offices throughout the state. Four years ago, the Bush-Cheney campaign barely had a presence in California, and spent little money. "But we are fully funded this time," Christiansen said, declining to give a figure.

The state GOP is making 125,000 voter contacts every weekend, "which blows the doors off of what we were doing four years ago," said Christiansen. "Sarah Palin has put a shot of energy into this race."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...p;feed=rss.news

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/elec...rthdakota_N.htm

You know what I found interesting in this article:

Democrats say the Obama campaign employees have been working to identify sympathetic voters, a task that is more difficult in North Dakota because the state does not have voter registration.

I guess anyone can just walk up to the polls and vote? I wonder how that works.....

Wow! 60,000! Good for her...That almost matches Obama's acceptance speech/concert!

And Obama is supposed to be the "rock star". Right.

The recent events that have taken place on Wall Street are exactly what the Dems have been waiting for to excuse their ambition of increased regulation, government mandates, and government control.

The free market is not perfect, but it will certainly be better off without being under the boot of the federal government

Ummmm.....excuse me. McCain is supporting more regulation as well. And your president GWB is as well. You can't blame this one on the Dems as much as you'd like to.

I don't recall any Democrat going on "Meet the Press" saying what we really really need right now is for Wall Street to tank. I would post more, but I think Wales says it best below:

Me too....I think the Democrats have been hoping for the market to crash so they can be all full of glee about how they can fix it. Too bad if you really believe something like that....I know a member of McCain's campaign staff suggested that a terrorist attack or something of the sort would benefit McCain but I haven't heard that the Democrats said that it would be great if the market fell apart so we could pump another $700 billion plus into the ever growing deficit just to be able to implement more regulation.

That's a pretty pathetic reach. I could see if you said that the Democrats will use this situation as a reason for implementing regulation but saying that they have been waiting for it shows how much contempt you have for Democrats. You make them sound like like extremely heartess people....and you shake your head at my silliness.

Great post.

Speaking of "issues"...

Dems seize on McCain's 13 cars

This is hypocrisy at it's finest. Do you recall the 2004 elections with Kerry and the attacks from the right on his wife? Because she was the Heinz ketchup heir?

Now the right is crying when the shoe is on the other foot. Believe me, if Obama didn't know how many houses he had (!) or owned 13 cars (!), you and Casey would be shouting from the rooftops "ELITIST!" But it's OK for McCain. I see.

Now back to the financial issues of the day.

Democrats want to cut salaries of chief executives at firms that participate in the bailout and slash severance packages for their top management. While obviously, the Republicans are balking at the thought.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26828023/

I'd be interested to hear everyone's opinion on that matter. For me, it seems like a good idea. Why continue to pay these people so much money when the government has to bailout the company??

Jess, do you think it was a mistake for the Clinton Administration to pressure lenders to make risky loans?

The liberal Village Voice previously chronicled how Clinton Administration housing secretary Andrew Cuomo helped spawn the mortgage crisis through his pressure on lenders to promote affordable housing and diversity. “Andrew Cuomo, the youngest Housing and Urban Development secretary in history, made a series of decisions between 1997 and 2001 that gave birth to the country’s current crisis. He took actions that—in combination with many other factors—helped plunge Fannie and Freddie into the subprime markets without putting in place the means to monitor their increasingly risky investments.

http://www.openmarket.org/2008/09/16/clint...tgage-meltdown/

There's no denying that the Clinton Administration probably played a hand in the current crisis.

But com'on.

It's be eight years since they left office and you are telling me in all that time, the Great Republican Minds that currently occupy the White House had no idea this was coming? That they let these policies stand after Clinton left office. And they have none of the blame??? You can honestly say that all this is Clinton's fault?

If so, I don't see how any honest debate can continue on this topic if Repubs feel that way. At least Dems can admit when they have made a mistake.

Democrats want to cut salaries of chief executives at firms that participate in the bailout and slash severance packages for their top management. While obviously, the Republicans are balking at the thought.

No argument from me there, Greg. These people reaped huge rewards on the backs of the foolish and ill-informed... it's time to pay the piper.

Another group I don't want benefitting are people who entered into risky loans, then simply walked away from their "investment" when they couldn't pay their bills. Screw those people... Does it really take that much brainpower to realize $0 down + $300,000 loan + Adjustable Rate Mortgage + $10/hour job = DISASTER?

>>sighs<<

No argument from me there, Greg. These people reaped huge rewards on the backs of the foolish and ill-informed... it's time to pay the piper.

Ahhhh....we agree on something! That's good to know, GoldenDogs.

Another group I don't want benefitting are people who entered into risky loans, then simply walked away from their "investment" when they couldn't pay their bills. Screw those people... Does it really take that much brainpower to realize $0 down + $300,000 loan + Adjustable Rate Mortgage + $10/hour job = DISASTER?

>>sighs<<

I see your point. From my personal experience, my partner and I were looking to buy a house and we found this absolutely beautiful townhouse close to downtown. The listing price was 500K. Now, we are fortunate enough that we aren't poor, but by no means could we afford that house (as much as I wanted to live there). That didn't stop several brokers from trying to talk us into it though. Instead, we found a house about 300K less in a suburb and even now sometimes I think it's too much.

That being said....again, I do see your point.... but how much of this was brokers pressuring people with high pitch sales techniques? First time home buyers can take people's promises as golden and not ask too many questions. And when I was buying my house, I certainly didn't know what an "ARM" was. I'm not trying to make excuses for them. Just sayin'.

There's no denying that the Clinton Administration probably played a hand in the current crisis.

But com'on.

It's be eight years since they left office and you are telling me in all that time, the Great Republican Minds that currently occupy the White House had no idea this was coming? That they let these policies stand after Clinton left office. And they have none of the blame??? You can honestly say that all this is Clinton's fault?

If so, I don't see how any honest debate can continue on this topic if Repubs feel that way. At least Dems can admit when they have made a mistake.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...agewanted=print

September 11, 2003

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.

Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

”These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ”The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

”I don’t see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,” Mr. Watt said.

Edited September 22, 200817 yr by GoldenDogs

Ahhhh....we agree on something! That's good to know, GoldenDogs.

I see your point. From my personal experience, my partner and I were looking to buy a house and we found this absolutely beautiful townhouse close to downtown. The listing price was 500K. Now, we are fortunate enough that we aren't poor, but by no means could we afford that house (as much as I wanted to live there). That didn't stop several brokers from trying to talk us into it though. Instead, we found a house about 300K less in a suburb and even now sometimes I think it's too much.

That being said....again, I do see your point.... but how much of this was brokers pressuring people with high pitch sales techniques? First time home buyers can take people's promises as golden and not ask too many questions. And when I was buying my house, I certainly didn't know what an "ARM" was. I'm not trying to make excuses for them. Just sayin'.

I have no doubt many, many people were preyed upon by real estate brokers, agents, and mortgage lenders. It was all to keep the party going. I do expect a level of personal responsibility, though, from grown people managing their financial affairs. Sounds like you guys did pretty well for yourself and that's cool! I've always looked at ARM's suspiciously and won't do it... When I bought my place, I insisted on a fixed rate. Next time I buy, I'll go fixed...

We agree on many, many things Greg! We just don't talk about them.