This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

Assuming McCain/Palin loses this election (which I hope they will) what do you think is next for both of them?

I'm actually scared that this woman has a future in the Republican Party. There are already whispers about her running in 2012....

MSNBC had several analysts talks about it and they to agree that the potential is there.

I think she will try very hard to position herself for 2012. It will be tough to maintain a national profile as governor of Alaska. She will be competing with people like Mike Huckabee, who did very well for himself in the primaries; the governor of Louisiana; the governor of Florida; and the governor of Minnesota. I think, right now, she is trying to protect herself from the fallout from the disaster that this election could be for the Republicans. I think a lot of things are in play for 2012. If Obama does well, she will not run. I expect to see her lining up for a U.S. Senate seat. I think that is the only way she can stay in the limelight for the next four years. It is just difficult for a governor in Alaska to generate much attention over an extended period of time.

As far as McCain, he'll finish out his U.S. Senate term and retire. He has not done well so far in this campaign.

Wow! Its so over LOL.

Thank god.

Trying not to get my hopes up just in case something goes wrong!

Palin and Hasselbeck blast 'ridiculous' wardrobe story

Posted: 02:59 PM ET

From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby, CNN's Dana Bash

Palin blasted the media for focusing on the $150,000 wardrobe story.

TAMPA, Florida (CNN) – Ensuring that news of the Republican National Committee's sartorial spending spree will remain in the headlines for at least one more news cycle, Sarah Palin on Sunday sounded off on the $150,000 wardrobe that was purchased for her in September, denouncing the report as "ridiculous" and declaring emphatically: "Those clothes, they are not my property."

A senior adviser to John McCain told CNN's Dana Bash that the comments about her wardrobe "were not the remarks we sent to her plane this morning." Palin did not discuss the wardrobe story at her rally in Kissimmee later in the day.

But in Tampa, Palin happily broached the clothing issue after being introduced by "The View" co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck, who accused Palin's opponents of being "fixated on her wardrobe" and "deliberately sexist."

That opened the door for Palin to weigh in on a topic that has frustrated the candidate and her advisers since the story first broke five days ago.

"This whole thing with the wardrobe, you know I have tried to just ignore it because it is so ridiculous, but I am glad now that Elisabeth brought it up, cause it gives me an opportunity without the filter of the media to get to tell you the whole clothes thing," she said.

"Those clothes, they are not my property. Just like the lighting and the staging and everything else that the RNC purchased, I'm not taking them with me. I am back to wearing my own clothes from my favorite consignment shop in Anchorage, Alaska. You'd think — not that I would even have to address the issue because, as Elisabeth is suggesting, the double standard here it's — gosh, we don't even want to waste our time."

Palin, however, forged on.

"I am glad, though, that she brought up accessories also. Let me tell you a little bit about a couple of accessories, didn't think that we would be talking about it, but my earrings — I see a Native Americans for Palin poster," she said. "These are beaded earrings from Todd's mom who is a Yupik Eskimo up in Alaska, Native American, Native Alaskan.

"And my wedding ring, it's in Todd's pocket, 'cause it hurts sometimes when I shake hands and it gets squished," she continued. "A $35 wedding ring from Hawaii that I bought myself and 'cause I always thought with my ring it's not what it's made of, it's what it represents, and 20 years later, happy to wear it. And then finally the other accessory, you bet I'm a gold — I'm a blue star mom. I'm wearing this in honor of my son who is fighting over in Iraq right now defending all of you."

After spending four minutes on the shopping escapade, Palin switched gears and trained her sights on Barack Obama, who, she said, is prematurely measuring the White House drapes.

"Barack Obama and I, we both have spent quite some time on the basketball court," she said. "But where I come from, you have to win the game before you start cutting down the nets."

Palin accused the Democrat of renting a stadium for a victory party on November 4.

That's actually not the case — Obama's rally on election night will be held outdoors in Grant Park in downtown Chicago.

"They've overlooked though the minor detail of earning your confidence and your trust and winning your votes," she said.

Palin "annoyed" with CBS interviewer

Posted: 12:00 PM ET

From CNN Political Producer Peter Hamby

Palin said Saturday she was 'annoyed' with Couric after her interview.

FORT WAYNE, Indiana (CNN) – Campaigning Saturday in Fort Wayne, Indiana, a city once represented in Congress by another vice presidential candidate named Dan Quayle, Sarah Palin delivered one of her longest stump speeches to date and revealed that she was “annoyed” with the line of questioning presented by Katie Couric in her now-infamous interview with CBS.

Palin reprised a story she last told a week ago in Noblesville, Indiana about her sit-down with Couric, which was widely panned.

“Last time I was here I got to tell a crowd that I had to give a national interview that didn’t go so well,” she said. “And it was because I was kind of annoyed with the questions that I was being asked because I thought they were kind of irrelevant to, you know, national security issues and getting our economy back on track, so I kind of showed some of that annoyance.”

Couric did, in fact, ask Palin several questions about the economy and national security, focusing in particular on the congressional bailout package, the mortgage crisis, John McCain’s record on regulation, the war in Afghanistan, hunting terrorists in Pakistan, Russia, Iran, Syria, Israel and the role of the United States in the world.

Palin joked, however, about another line of questioning.

“But I think the one question that I answered that everyone could agree on, it maybe shows where my heart is… too is, she asked me this relevant question: What was my favorite movie? And I said ‘Hoosiers!’”

The governor continued to press the campaign’s message of the day: that Barack Obama and congressional Democrats will, if elected, expand government and redistribute the hard-earned dollars of regular Americans, criticisms that brought on accusatory shouts of “socialist!,” “Communist!” and, at one point, “Hussein the socialist!”

Palin said that on election day, “what we're going to have to do together, voters, what we have to do is fight for what is right and free and uniquely American. Let us put our trust in each other, not big government.”

The Indiana crowd — easily Palin’s largest of the day — was warmed up by country legend Hank Williams, Jr., who often appears at Palin campaign events to perform his recently-penned ode to the GOP ticket: “McCain-Palin tradition.”

But Williams may have been channeling the enthusiasm of the crowds for Palin — and also reflecting recent reports that Palin is “going rogue” with an eye toward the 2012 presidential race. At one point during his performance, he intentionally scrambled the song’s lyrics and put the Alaskan at the top of the ticket, praising a “Palin-McCain tradition.”

That musical witticism earned Williams a loud cheer from the crowd.

Uhm look....another 100,000 people with nothing else to do....this time in Denver:

^^^^LOL!

God I pray that this man is elected President and protected in every possible way from the loonies. I really think and hope that he can get us back on the right track.

The McCain/Palin Campaign:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLvvWf47dqM...feature=related

I can see Keith Olbermann and/or Rachel Maddow jumping on this:

New York Times Confuses Year-Old Obama Book With Inaugural Speech

Jason Linkins October 26, 2008

The clock's running out on the press and the myriad ways that they can possibly mis-report the news of this election, but these consummate professionals continue to find ways to distinguish themselves. Take this part of yesterday's New York Times article, "Building a White House Team Before the Election Is Decided":

Mr. Obama's transition team is led by a former White House chief of staff, John D. Podesta, who has been preparing for the task at the research organization he runs, the Center for American Progress, since long before it was clear who would win his party's nomination...

Mr. Podesta has been mapping out the transition so systematically that he has already written a draft Inaugural Address for Mr. Obama, which he published this summer in a book called "The Power of Progress."

The speech calls for rebuilding a "grand alliance" with the rest of the world, bringing troops home from Iraq, recommitting to the war in Afghanistan, cutting poverty in half in 10 years and reducing greenhouse gases 80 percent by 2050.

Okay. Here's the funny thing about the boldfaced sentence. Not only is it entirely false, but the truth is actually so easy to verify, that a child could have factchecked this paragraph. The Power Of Progress was published on August 18, 2008. As with most books, it took time to produce. In the case of this book, much of the work had been completed before anyone thought that Barack Obama was the nominee. According to Podesta's organization, the Center for American Progress, "The inaugural address was written and submitted to the publisher in March 2008, during a time when Podesta was supporting Sen. Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Podesta re-did the introduction to the book -- but not the inaugural address -- in June when it became clear that Obama would emerge as the nominee."

Of course, looking for anything that might advantage his campaign without tying it to the crazy antics of face-carving fabricators, the McCain campaign seized on this story as a sign of Obama's "presumptuousness." Please note how the fact that this story came from the New York Times forces McCain to not cite the source, having made NYT-hate a critical component of his campaign.

MCCAIN: You know what? We just learned from a newspaper today that Senator Obama's inaugural address is already written. You know? I'm not making it up, I'm not making it up. An awful lot of voters are still undecided but he's decided for them that, well, why wait? It's time to move forward with his first inaugural address. My friends, when I pull this thing off, I have a request for my opponent. I want him to save that manuscript of his inaugural address and donate it to the Smithsonian so they can put it right next to the Chicago paper that said, "Dewey defeats Truman."

Poor John McCain, screwed again by the Grey Lady! Anyway, Podesta responds:

While I appreciate Senator McCain's plug for my book, the Power of Progress, his charge is a complete fabrication. He bases this claim on a New York Times story which distorted and confused a chapter I wrote last spring, for a book that was published this summer, with work I am doing this fall on behalf of Senator Obama.

The inaugural address in the "Power of Progress" was a literary device I used to sum up the arguments in the book. It was completed well in advance of my work for Senator Obama and has nothing to do with the Obama campaign or pre-transiton. No one involved in pre-transition work has written one word of any address inaugural or otherwise.

And naturally, the NYT's Caucus blog manages the factcheck their peers cannot

That's funny......and it makes John McCain look even more crazy and desperate than he was already.

That's funny......and it makes John McCain look even more crazy and desperate than he was already.

Honestly I think that both McCain and Palin only open there mouths long enough to take one foot out and only to put the other one in.

I just want to weigh in on the charge of sexism over the $150,000 spent on the Palins' wardrobe. Unless I'm missing something, the money was spent on wardrobe for her, her husband and her kids and I don't see why questioning how the RNC spent that money is sexist. Had the other candidates and their families been outfitted by the RNC or DNC, the same issue would arise. The concern is the money could have been spent to help other candidates in their respective elections.

If people were attacking the way Palin is dressed or her outfits then the issue would be about sexism. The other issue is about her being a hockey mom in Nieman Marcus and Saks' fashion. Saying that the wardrobe is part of the props like the lighting, etc and that she's going to give them back after the campaign makes no difference and why would she give them back if her ticket wins?

What is sexist is the men in her party (and some of the Democrats as well) mentioning her looks when they're supposed to be discussing/debating her political positions. She and that misguided Elisabeth Hasselback need to give it a rest about how she's put upon because the RNC wasted money on trying to make her look vice presidential.

You know, it would be fine with me if Palin/McCain lost by 10 points and 100 electoral votes. Perhaps, it would send a message about campaigns that are built on misrepresentations and lies.

Don't know if this has been addressed but wanted to talk about it.

So I've heard that now McCain has been promoting Republican senators and house members to try to get more of them to win so the Democrats don't get the 60 and a bigger house majority. I really don't see this working though. Senators and members of the house work for their states as well as the country. Take Ted Stevens. Nobody outside of Alaska likes him. He could win again, and after all, it was to their benefit to have the bridge to nowhere be built. Alaskans (and other people who have their respective senators that pull stuff to them) don't want to have to make the sacrifice, so who would.

Edited October 27, 200817 yr by bandbfan

I just want to weigh in on the charge of sexism over the $150,000 spent on the Palins' wardrobe. Unless I'm missing something, the money was spent on wardrobe for her, her husband and her kids and I don't see why questioning how the RNC spent that money is sexist. Had the other candidates and their families been outfitted by the RNC or DNC, the same issue would arise. The concern is the money could have been spent to help other candidates in their respective elections.

If people were attacking the way Palin is dressed or her outfits then the issue would be about sexism. The other issue is about her being a hockey mom in Nieman Marcus and Saks' fashion. Saying that the wardrobe is part of the props like the lighting, etc and that she's going to give them back after the campaign makes no difference and why would she give them back if her ticket wins?

What is sexist is the men in her party (and some of the Democrats as well) mentioning her looks when they're supposed to be discussing/debating her political positions. She and that misguided Elisabeth Hasselback need to give it a rest about how she's put upon because the RNC wasted money on trying to make her look vice presidential.

Speaking on the wardrobe topic, did anyone see on one of the news shows that one of Palin's younger daughters (age 7 or 8 maybe) was carrying around an $800 designer bag? I thought that was hilarous....must have been part of that $150,000 they spent.

Meanwhile, the metioned how Obama says that he basically buys like 5 suits at a time, and wears them until they are "well-worn," and that both Barack and Michelle haven't been flaunting designer clothing in public like the Republicans have been.

You know, it would be fine with me if Palin/McCain lost by 10 points and 100 electoral votes. Perhaps, it would send a message about campaigns that are built on misrepresentations and lies.

Oh I agree....I would be perfectly happy with it as well, as long as the majority of the of the Republicans in Congress, Republican Governors, and those in other state and local races around the country that have supported this ill-ran McCain/Palin run go down in defeat as well.