This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

Brian is absoultely right regarding the fact that blacks tend to be very monolithic in how they vote: all I need to do to prove is point is to mention the fact that the Democrats always get 90% of the black vote in every single election. No other group--including gays--consistently votes for one political party 90% of the time. And, because they always vote for Democrats in such huge numbers, the Democrats completely take the black vote for granted.

Quite frankly, I'm getting upset over the suggestion that some Obama supporters are making over the fact that one must be a racist if he chooses to vote against Obama. There are plenty of reasons other than race--such as his lack of experience, his inability to confront leaders in his own party, and his left-wing economic and foreign policies--as to why somebody would choose to vote against Obama.

P.S. Regarding the issue of gay marriage, I always find it absurdly amusing how the Republicans are solely to blame for getting in the way of it. The fact of the matter is that most Democrats--including Obama and Biden--are opposed to legalizing gay marriage. Yet, when Democrats oppose gay marriage, the gays give them a free pass because "it's something they have to do to get elected." On the other hand, everytime a Republican opposes gay marriage, he's accused of hating all gay people.

Democrats don't take the black vote for granted. If I'm not mistaken their nominee is black

No one ever said that someone must be a racist if he votes against Obama. No one at all.

Republicans are held to a higher standard on gay marriage because they put it on the ballot, they openly support constitutional amendments forbidding gay marriage and they shamelessly placed on the ballot in 2004 to bring out their block vote -- Christian Conservatives (aka The God Squad). Democrats are not out promoting a constitutional amendment and they do not pound their chests, as Karl Rove did in 2004, saying how their strategy of putting the gay amendment on state ballots throughout the country ensured Bush's re-election.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/sh...ews/slater.html

Edited October 9, 200817 yr by Jess

Why would a black person be a racist if they voted against Obama? I can see why people would vote against Obama and for McCain and quite frankly I can't come up with a valid reason that has anything to do with skin color. Since I will be voting against McCain and Sarah Palin, does that make me an ageist and a woman hater?

I really enjoy this thread and much of the sparring here but I find that I am very disheartened. Its proven to me yet again how very naive I am. And a little ignorant. It's making me afraid of what I can say in this thread for fear that I would be ridiculed.

Why would a black person be a racist if they voted against Obama? I can see why people would vote against Obama and for McCain and quite frankly I can't come up with a valid reason that has anything to do with skin color. Since I will be voting against McCain and Sarah Palin, does that make me an ageist and a woman hater?

I really enjoy this thread and much of the sparring here but I find that I am very disheartened. Its proven to me yet again how very naive I am. And a little ignorant. It's making me afraid of what I can say in this thread for fear that I would be ridiculed.

Yeah, you and me both. Which is why I have given up on it. Intolerance for varying opinions rules the day here... Those who preach it don't practice it. It is extremely hypocritical and I have little respect for those who are so very unfair.

Palin represents ‘fatal cancer’ to GOP, conservative says

Posted: 04:19 PM ET

From CNN Associate Political Editor Rebecca Sinderbrand

(CNN) – Conservative New York Times columnist David Brooks, who has expressed doubts about Sarah Palin’s readiness to serve as vice president, said this week the Alaska governor “represents a fatal cancer to the Republican Party.”

Brooks praised Palin’s debate performance and called her a natural political talent, but told a New York audience Monday that “experience matters”: “Do I think she’s ready to be president or vice president? No, she’s not even close to that,” he said.

“…Reagan had an immense faith in the power of ideas,” he also said, in remarks first reported by the Huffington Post. “But there has been a counter, more populist tradition, which is not only to scorn liberal ideas, but to scorn ideas entirely. And I'm afraid that Sarah Palin has those prejudices. I think President Bush has those prejudices."

Other prominent conservatives, including George Will and David Frum, have publicly questioned Palin's readiness to be vice president. Prominent conservative columnist Kathleen Parker, an early supporter, said late last month that recent interviews have shown the Alaska governor is "out of her league" and should leave the GOP presidential ticket for the good of the party.

Brooks himself has also written skeptically about Palin. "Sarah Palin has many virtues," he wrote in a recent column. "If you wanted someone to destroy a corrupt establishment, she'd be your woman. But the constructive act of governance is another matter. She has not been engaged in national issues, does not have a repertoire of historic patterns and, like President Bush, she seems to compensate for her lack of experience with brashness and excessive decisiveness."

http://www.crooksandliars.com/logan-murphy...day-open-thread

Look at the button on their Open Thread.

Edited October 9, 200817 yr by Roman

http://www.crooksandliars.com/silentpatrio...in-sank-republi

Nina Easton: John McCain Sank the Free Market Republican Ship Last Night

http://www.crooksandliars.com/jon-perr/mcc...-bailout-homeow

McCain Flip-Flops on Mortgage Bailout for Homeowners

You know...."violence" leads to more "violence". If you retaliate, you're just as responsbile as the person who "starated it" which eventually nobody will remember who "started it".......the "violence" will just continue.

There's no need to attack each other.

To quote Robert from Brothers & Sisters: "You're all grown ups. Get a filter!"

And to show that I'm serious about this thread and that I've had enough If there is ANY negative talk towards a member in this thread, they will be suspended. If you don't like it. Fine. I'm ready to pull the trigger.

So my advice, just talk about the issues and don't diss anyone.

To use the Homeland Security Advisory System - this thread is now RED for SEVERE!

P.S. Regarding the issue of gay marriage, I always find it absurdly amusing how the Republicans are solely to blame for getting in the way of it. The fact of the matter is that most Democrats--including Obama and Biden--are opposed to legalizing gay marriage. Yet, when Democrats oppose gay marriage, the gays give them a free pass because "it's something they have to do to get elected." On the other hand, everytime a Republican opposes gay marriage, he's accused of hating all gay people.

What's up Max. I was going respond to your entire post, but this particular paragraph is near and dear to me.

What Jess said above is a lot of the reason why I am more likely to dislike a Republican opposed to gay marriage than a Democrat. The Republican party has been using gay marriage as a wedge issue for the past 8 years under the leadership of GWB and his right-hand man, Karl Rove. Jess is right - the Republican party put this issue in the spotlight, encouraged ballot issues in every state and were proud of it. Not to mention that GWB is the first president in history that attempted to write discrimination into the US Constitution by way of his gay marriage ban. Casting anyone (including straight couples that don't believe in "traditional" marriage) as second class citizens because they can not get married.

I will add that the only political figures that have supported "conversion" programs (like Palin) belong to the Republican party. Mind you, I didn't say all Republicans. But the ones that have come out in support of such nonsense are of the right wing persuasion. They're wrong. These programs do not work. How would you feel if a politician told you that not only you're not allowed to marry the person you love, but that your entire life is wrong and they want to change it?

Being gay is not something someone chooses. That's a fact. You can't "choose" to be gay anymore than you can "choose" to be straight. And to have a politician, one that is supposed to represent you in Congress, announce it's wrong and you must change...well, believe me. It's not a good feeling.

Concerning Democrats. IMHO, they are more accepting of the GLBT community than Republicans are. Other than gay marriage, Bill Clinton wanted to end the ban on gays in the military when he was elected. And who lead the opposition? Republicans. IA that Dems are given a pass a lot of the time on the gay marriage issue for the reason you said "to get elected". But they have traditionally done more for GLBT than Republicans. Ronald Reagan didn't even say the word "AIDS" until his second term because up until that time, he thought it was a "gay disease". And did you know that there is a gay Republican group - the Log Cabin Republicans - that the Republican party has barred from attending the convention every year since GWB was campaigning?

You see the history there? I think the extra scrutiny of Republicans IRT gay issues is warranted because of it.

I really enjoy this thread and much of the sparring here but I find that I am very disheartened. Its proven to me yet again how very naive I am. And a little ignorant. It's making me afraid of what I can say in this thread for fear that I would be ridiculed.

I hope that everyone feels welcome to express how they feel in this thread. That's what makes it so much fun. At first, it can be quite intimidating because you never know how your posts will come across to others, regardless of how innocuous you feel they are when you're posting them. But most of us here are, I think, fairly objective and open-minded.

Heck, I'm a liberal through and through but even I find myself nodding (at times) to posts by Brian or Casey.

Yeah, you and me both. Which is why I have given up on it. Intolerance for varying opinions rules the day here... Those who preach it don't practice it. It is extremely hypocritical and I have little respect for those who are so very unfair.

On the hopes that you will check back into the thread, Brian. I sincerely hope that you reconsider and continue posting here with us. I enjoy your posts, whether we agree ideologically or not, I think we have a lot of fun debating the issues. Come back, buddy!

Toups

Is the Obama campaign making a mountain out of a mole hill? I'm not sure. But IA that McCain's use of "That One" in the debates came across as very disrepectful.

From "The One" to "That One": McCain remark irks

"The snarled 'that one' also contributed to McCain's image as a kind of mean old Scrooge, not so much a battle-scarred warrior as an embittered one," Shales wrote.

Is the Obama campaign making a mountain out of a mole hill? I'm not sure. But IA that McCain's use of "That One" in the debates came across as very disrepectful.

From "The One" to "That One": McCain remark irks

This merits a "yes" and "no" response for me. In the grand scheme of things "yes" because McCain probably just meant "that one" as in that one senator.

From a political strategic standpoint "no" and I think it's really the surrogates and other "offended" peope that are running with that. I read an excerpt from Michelle Obama's Larry King transcript and she didn't make anything of it. I think some people just want to use it to their advantage because McCain and now Palin are trying to imply that Barack Obama is unAmerican and make people fear him. No one is going to make the distinction between fearing him as a candidate and fearing him as a black man.

Is the Obama campaign making a mountain out of a mole hill? I'm not sure. But IA that McCain's use of "That One" in the debates came across as very disrepectful.

From "The One" to "That One": McCain remark irks

I thought his remark "that one" was a a misspeak until I read that story. I thought McCain had meant to say, "which senator vote for it, that one"

When I read that article, it appears that it was intentional and intended to be belittling. McCain has an awful temper, and appears not to be a very good loser. It behaved badly when he was against Bush in the 2000 primaries.

I now think the comment was both disrespectful, intentional and petty.

I thought his remark "that one" was a a misspeak until I read that story. I thought McCain had meant to say, "which senator vote for it, that one"

When I read that article, it appears that it was intentional and intended to be belittling. McCain has an awful temper, and appears not to be a very good loser. It behaved badly when he was against Bush in the 2000 primaries.

I now think the comment was both disrespectful, intentional and petty.

I still think he meant that one senator but because he's such an angry man full of contempt for Obama, he could not control his tone.

The message of his campaign lends itself to his not getting the benefit of the doubt and the fact that his campaign issued "The One" Obama cufflinks doesn't help his cause. He needs to drop the obsession but that's probably hard since certain people in his party seem to have it just as bad like Elizabeth Hasselback.

Since you and GGL articulated the Republicans and the gay marriage issue so well, I just want to reiterate that I see nothing wrong with bloc voting and I don't see a reason to be bothered by anyone who implies that it's done because people don't think for themselves. Even if that is the reason then so what.

There were two groups of people denied the right to vote and it was gender and race related. Women happen to come in all races and black people happen to come in both genders (I know duh). Since we're not that far removed from the Civil Rights movement and the Republican party doesn't seem to be all encompassing then it's not surprising, shocking or strange that most black voters are Democrats.

I'm posting this mainly because I like the last paragraph:

Sarah Palin unappealin' to Jon Stewart

Thursday, October 9th 2008, 9:51 AM

If anyone had any doubts as to whom Jon Stewart supports for President, they were cleared Tuesday night at the Project ALS benefit at the Waldorf-Astoria. Host Ben Stiller called Stewart "America's young elder statesman of political comedy" and surmised that on his Comedy Central sendup of the news, Stewart "can't take sides."

"Oh," said Stewart. "I think it's pretty clear.

"Neither of them is perfect, but if you, out of nowhere, are going to grab a woman out of the woods and make her your vice presidential candidate, what can I do?

"[sarah Palin] is like Jodie Foster in the movie 'Nell,' " Stewart continued. "They just found her, and she was speaking her own special language.

"Have you noticed how [Palin's] rallies have begun to take on the characteristics of the last days of the Weimar Republic? In Florida, she asked 'Who is Barack Obama?' Hey, lady, we just met YOU five f-ing weeks ago."

I still think he meant that one senator but because he's such an angry man full of contempt for Obama, he could not control his tone.

The message of his campaign lends itself to his not getting the benefit of the doubt and the fact that his campaign issued "The One" Obama cufflinks doesn't help his cause. He needs to drop the obsession but that's probably hard since certain people in his party seem to have it just as bad like Elizabeth Hasselback.

Since you and GGL articulated the Republicans and the gay marriage issue so well, I just want to reiterate that I see nothing wrong with bloc voting and I don't see a reason to be bothered by anyone who implies that it's done because people don't think for themselves. Even if that is the reason then so what.

There were two groups of people denied the right to vote and it was gender and race related. Women happen to come in all races and black people happen to come in both genders (I know duh). Since we're not that far removed from the Civil Rights movement and the Republican party doesn't seem to be all encompassing then it's not surprising, shocking or strange that most black voters are Democrats.

This is absolutely correct. Most blacks vote democrat because they feel that they address their needs. However, many blacks are conservative in moral and social areas (church going) Here in CA many are hoping that they will help pass prop 8 because of that way of thinking.