Obama versus McCain (versus the rest)

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by VPI97

Not at all. I'm arguing that regardless of experience, the prospect of Joe Biden as President is just as unappealing as the prospect of Sarah Palin as President. After his showing in the primary race, I would suspect that most people agree with me.

Be patriotic! Pay more taxes!

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

The complaint is not that she accepted the money but that she told you she'd refused it.

No...the initial complaint that I was arguing against was that you claimed "she found a legal way of retaining the money without building the bridge." When I informed you that all of that took place prior to her run as Governor, you ignored the facts I put forth and changed your argument to another aspect of the issue.

I really couldn't care less about when she meant by "thanks or no thanks"...I ignore the rhetoric for the most part and instead went about about reading (non-partisan) articles from 2005-07 on the whole bridge deal. When I found out is what I posted. If you choose to ignore what I wrote, that's fine with me.

She simply doesn't have the experience and it is ludicrous to suggest she does.

Considering I never suggested she did, I agree. All I said was that Joe Biden's appeal as President wasn't much different. I guess it wasn't a matter of you ignoring what I wrote...you just didn't bother to read any of it.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

She simply doesn't have the experience and it is ludicrous to suggest she does.

You do understand that the person at the top of the Democratic ticket has the thinnest political resume of any major party nominee in 68 years, right?

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

You do understand that the person at the top of the Democratic ticket has the thinnest political resume of any major party nominee in 68 years, right?

"I think [Barack Obama] can be ready, but right now I don't believe he is. The presidency is not something that lends itself to on-the-job training." - Joe Biden, August 2007

There's your Democrat Vice Presidential candidate.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by VPI97

I really couldn't care less about when she meant by "thanks or no thanks"...I ignore the rhetoric for the most part

It's bullshit, it's lies, it's hypocrisy and it takes place at exactly the moment when she asks you to trust that she is the one to reform the system. That you should write this off as meaningless "rhetoric" merely illustrates denial - that you will continue to see "no evil" whatever comes to light. It's not unknown!

When she asks for my trust with a lie I ask myself "Is she utterly lacking in self-awareness? Does she think I'm an idiot? Couldn't she come up with some justification that is at least half true? Does she expect to win or retain my support with a lie?"

The event itself is unimportant. But what it reveals about the mental attitude that Palin has towards those she seeks to deceive is crucial.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

You do understand that the person at the top of the Democratic ticket has the thinnest political resume of any major party nominee in 68 years, right?

Of course. I have no problem recognising what is patently obvious.

[Chief Rum]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

I guess im being too technical. Im saying that before someone opens their mouth you can't be certain what is going to come out so you *should* listen and then decide to ignore it/consider it/ etc.

Ah, but does one need to flip a coin 1000 times before one can conclude that only heads or tails will come up?

[fantom1979]

Originally Posted by VPI97

The bridge funding went from a congressional earmark to a state transportation project before she was Governor...and retaining the federal money was the work of Sen. Stevens and former Gov Murkowski in 2005.

I am very curious about your source on this statement. Everything I have read implies that Palin and the state of Alaska was seeking money for the Gravina Island Bridge until September 21st, 2007. According to the Governor of Alaska website, Alaska kept $36 million in federal funds upon the decision to cancel the project on the above date.

Gravina Access Project Redirected
September 21, 2007, Juneau, Alaska - Governor Sarah Palin today directed the Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to look for the most fiscally responsible alternative for access to the Ketchikan airport and Gravina Island instead of proceeding any further with the proposed $398 million bridge.
“Ketchikan desires a better way to reach the airport, but the $398 million bridge is not the answer,” said Governor Palin. “Despite the work of our congressional delegation, we are about $329 million short of full funding for the bridge project, and it’s clear that Congress has little interest in spending any more money on a bridge between Ketchikan and Gravina Island,” Governor Palin added. “Much of the public’s attitude toward Alaska bridges is based on inaccurate portrayals of the projects here. But we need to focus on what we can do, rather than fight over what has happened.” The Department of Transportation has approximately $36 million in federal funds that will become available for other projects with the shutdown of the Gravina Island bridge project. Governor Palin has directed Commissioner Leo von Scheben to review transportation projects statewide to prepare a list of possible uses for the funds, while the department also looks for a more affordable answer for Gravina Island access.
“There is no question we desperately need to construct new roads in this state, including in Southeast Alaska, where skyrocketing costs for the Alaska Marine Highway System present an impediment to the state’s budget and the region’s economy,” said von Scheben.
“The original purpose of this project was to improve access to Gravina Island, and we will continue to work with the community to help them attain that goal,” von Scheben said.
The commissioner said his department would continue to work with local officials to discuss future plans for development of Gravina Island.

My Source:
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by fantom1979

I am very curious about your source on this statement. Everything I have read implies that Palin and the state of Alaska was seeking money for the Gravina Island Bridge until September 21st, 2007. According to the Governor of Alaska website, Alaska kept $36 million in federal funds upon the decision to cancel the project on the above date.



My Source:
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin

What I understand, fantom1979, - though the detail keeps shifting - is that the money was granted to Stevens in Nov 2005 before Palin was governor. However the bridge by that time was coming under severe criticism which caused Congress to grant it under this state transport project. The reports conflict a little here, one saying that this meant Alaska could spend the money as they wished providing it was on a transport project.

But Palin took up the bridge (two bridges in fact) project as part of her election campaign for governor in 2006 criticising those who criticised the bridge for insulting the people who lived "nowhere" (ie where the bridge led). Building the bridge became part of her appeal as governor. This is confirmed by two of her campaign managers who have criticised her since deciding against the bridge.

From the figures I've seen the original cost of the Gavina bridge was around $300 million. As you see from Palin's press release (the one you report) the cost has risen to $398 million and Palin was told by Congress they would not provide any further funds. It was then that Palin decided to cancel the bridge because it had become too expensive and would have involved extra Alaskan funds to complete it.

A second source has said that Palin built the road mentioned above in order to retain the funding. I think it's more complex than that because two thirds of the grant was for the second bridge which may still be built. So exactly what the position was with the grant as a whole is open to debate.

[GrantDawg]

I think that McCain never imagine that Palin was going to be a permenant boost in the polls. It really isnt even why she was picked. She was picked to shore up the RR base of the GOP, who are very luke-warm at best on McCain. They were never going to vote for Obama, but there was a real danger of a low turn-out among that sector as they mustly dislike/distrust McCain. With Palin on the ticket, they now have a reason to go because they get to vote one of them. She was definitely not a pick to pull from the middle, but any choice he could have made to try that would have turned off that base even more.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I think that McCain never imagine that Palin was going to be a permenant boost in the polls. It really isnt even why she was picked. She was picked to shore up the RR base of the GOP, who are very luke-warm at best on McCain. They were never going to vote for Obama, but there was a real danger of a low turn-out among that sector as they mustly dislike/distrust McCain. With Palin on the ticket, they now have a reason to go because they get to vote one of them. She was definitely not a pick to pull from the middle, but any choice he could have made to try that would have turned off that base even more.

+1

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by Chief Rum

Ah, but does one need to flip a coin 1000 times before one can conclude that only heads or tails will come up?

I think humans are more complicated than a coin.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I think that McCain never imagine that Palin was going to be a permenant boost in the polls. It really isnt even why she was picked. She was picked to shore up the RR base of the GOP, who are very luke-warm at best on McCain. They were never going to vote for Obama, but there was a real danger of a low turn-out among that sector as they mustly dislike/distrust McCain. With Palin on the ticket, they now have a reason to go because they get to vote one of them. She was definitely not a pick to pull from the middle, but any choice he could have made to try that would have turned off that base even more.

+2

Picking Palin is the only reason McCain has a fighting chance. Picking Liebermann or Pawlenty would have sunk him as the RR wouldn't have come out in the numbers they have for Bush. The RR are the on-the-ground forces and the counter for Obama's highly regarded ground game.

[JPhillips]

I don't really disagree, but I think Palin was also aimed at independent women. From the initial announcement the McCain camp played up the vagina vote angle.

[albionmoonlight]

I agree that Palin was a RR pick.

Why do you think that he picked her and not Huckabee? I always figured he was the go-to guy if the campaign decided to go RR/base excitement.

Is it just the vagina thing?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by larrymcg421

Also, Rasmussen decided to waste time and money by polling Vermont. Obama is up 60-36 among Likely Voters there.

This is funny. Vermont has one Representative in the House, and he is Democrat Peter Welch. This year, the Republicans didn't even bother to run anyone for their party's nomination. However, a bunch of people did vote on the Republican side of the ballot, and wrote Welch in, apparently enough so that he's not only won the Democratic nomination for his seat, but also the Republican nomination as well.

It's like Chicago, but without the corruption.

[Passacaglia]

fivethirtyeight.com had had McCain as the favorite for at least a week, with a low to mid 50s percent chance of winning. Now they've got him with a 38.8% chance of winning. Crazy.

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

You do realize she's not running for president, right?

I don't understand this argument. What is the office of the Vice President if not the "just-in-case" President? I think Americans do recognize this. Has everyone forgotten 1988 - 1992, when we all prayed that George H.W. Bush wouldn't die in office?

Palin is to Quayle as Biden is to L.B.J. There's a reason people are more worried about Palin's credentials than Biden's.

The other thing I think people are forgetting is the time it takes for voters to get exposed to a candidate. Obama's been in the national public eye for four years now, which is about as long as Reagan had been, and longer than Clinton or JFK had been. Voters have had time to look at him and his record and decide whether or not they're comfortable having him as President.

Obviously for Biden & McCain, they've been in the public eye for so long, this is not an issue.

So then what we're seeing here is Palin, who's been in the national public eye for two weeks, not having a comfort level with a large number of voters. Unless you agree intrinsically with her policy positions (i.e. you're a member of the GOP social conservative base) you're probably thinking that Palin is, right now, how she's been packaged by the McCain campaign. You don't really know her, and that makes you uncomfortable thinking that she's one heartbeat away from the Presidency.

Simply put, the American electorate still does not have enough experience with Palin to decide if she's a reasonable person who is being maligned by the campaigning process or if she's a wingnut who just happened to get elected governor of Alaska.

[GrantDawg]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I don't really disagree, but I think Palin was also aimed at independent women. From the initial announcement the McCain camp played up the vagina vote angle.

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I agree that Palin was a RR pick.

Why do you think that he picked her and not Huckabee? I always figured he was the go-to guy if the campaign decided to go RR/base excitement.

Is it just the vagina thing?

I think there was a few reasons they went with Palin over say Huckabee.

1) The Vagina. She was never going to pull any die hard Clinton supporters. I think possibily the early polls showed some shift from that corner but they quickly moved back once they learned who she was. But there is always a segment of voters (not picking on women, but of any group) that vote less on issues and more on "like me" or other superficial reasons. She being a she will help on that front.

2) The unknown factor. Though there has been a lot of baggage that has been played out, she doesn't have the long-term baggage other well known candidates might bring. She hasn't been on the stage long enough for people to truly hate her yet.

3) The control ability factor. I think they believe they can hold her in check much better than they could say a Huckabee. She's new to the national stage, and much more willing to be steered because of the shock of what it is like to deal with it.

4) Charisma. McCain has none. Again, of the segment of votes that votes based on fluff, Obama had the edge by far. She hedges some of that off.

Really, when it is down to brass tacks, she was a very good pick. She gives McCain a much better chance to win than he had, and there are very few other choices he had to go with that would have helped him as much.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by GrantDawg

I think that McCain never imagine that Palin was going to be a permenant boost in the polls. It really isnt even why she was picked. She was picked to shore up the RR base of the GOP, who are very luke-warm at best on McCain. They were never going to vote for Obama, but there was a real danger of a low turn-out among that sector as they mustly dislike/distrust McCain. With Palin on the ticket, they now have a reason to go because they get to vote one of them. She was definitely not a pick to pull from the middle, but any choice he could have made to try that would have turned off that base even more.

I think that's correct, too. It was clearly meant to confirm the right wing vote that he couldn't bring in himself. I think there might have been a hope that she would pick up some of the Clinton women voters but I don't think there would be many of those - Clinton and Palin or polar opposites but there may be a few who would simply vote for a woman.

So I think McCain has probably been happy with the effect she's had but I think the gloss is wearing off now as voters are taking a more sober view of her and realise that there are problems there when you get beyond the electoral appeal and think of her in the White House.

[lungs]

Where have all the McCainiacs gone? It's gotten awfully quiet in this thread.

[ISiddiqui]

Aroo? There are plenty on this page itself.

[Passacaglia]

Maybe he has them all on ignore.

[lungs]

Yeah, but it doesn't seem the same as it was, say, even less than a week ago.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Maybe he has them all on ignore.

Nah, why would I ignore anybody?

Ignore lists are stupid.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by lungs

Nah, why would I ignore anybody?

Ignore lists are stupid.

It was just a joke. If you really had them on ignore, it seems odd that you would then ask where all the people you ignored were.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

It was just a joke. If you really had them on ignore, it seems odd that you would then ask where all the people you ignored were.

Your humor went above my head. I've only got my grade 10.

[JPhillips]

Here's a question for everyone. What happens to each of the candidates if they lose?

The first two are easy.

Biden: He'll have one or two more terms in the Senate
McCain: Finish this term, maybe run for reelection. He'll be a pain in the ass for an Obama administration.

Obama: I think he'd get tired of being in the Senate. He might serve a second term, but it wouldn't surprise me to see him leave the Senate for a foundation and the speaker's circuit.

Palin: This is the most difficult. If McCain wins she'll almost certainly be a Presidential candidate in four or eight years. However, if McCain loses I don't think she'll have a good shot at winning a Presidential election. She could be a Senator for life if she wanted, but that doesn't seem to fit her well. I see her finishing her term as Governor and relocating to be closer to Washington. She'll get writing and speaking jobs and run for the Presidency in 2012, but by then the newness will be gone and she won't win the primary. After that she stays moderately visible as a sometimes writer/talking head with forays into lower cabinet level positions.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

Here's a question for everyone. What happens to each of the candidates if they lose?

The first two are easy.

Biden: He'll have one or two more terms in the Senate
McCain: Finish this term, maybe run for reelection. He'll be a pain in the ass for an Obama administration.

Obama: I think he'd get tired of being in the Senate. He might serve a second term, but it wouldn't surprise me to see him leave the Senate for a foundation and the speaker's circuit.

Palin: This is the most difficult. If McCain wins she'll almost certainly be a Presidential candidate in four or eight years. However, if McCain loses I don't think she'll have a good shot at winning a Presidential election. She could be a Senator for life if she wanted, but that doesn't seem to fit her well. I see her finishing her term as Governor and relocating to be closer to Washington. She'll get writing and speaking jobs and run for the Presidency in 2012, but by then the newness will be gone and she won't win the primary. After that she stays moderately visible as a sometimes writer/talking head with forays into lower cabinet level positions.

Obama will probably run for Governor of Illinois if he loses the Presidential race.

Palin will get tired of the lifestyle. No way she moves to Washington. She might run for the Senate for a while to keep her name in the news, but really, if she's the lightweight people seem to fashion her, she'll fade into bolivian.

[ISiddiqui]

Biden and McCain will stay in the Senate for a few terms. Yes, McCain will be a pain for Obama's administration and will likely be the top Republican, even though he won't have a leadership role (like Ted Kennedy for the Dems these past 8 years).

Obama, I will think will serve at least 2 more terms. He may decide to be a Kennedy like Senator (ie, serve for life and be the liberal voice), or he may end up being a Secretary of State or something for the next Democratic President and then go into foundational stuff.

Palin, I think will run for Senate and will run for President in 2012. I think she may have a decent shot at winning, actually, but will fall short.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Obama will probably run for Governor of Illinois if he loses the Presidential race.

Palin will get tired of the lifestyle. No way she moves to Washington. She might run for the Senate for a while to keep her name in the news, but really, if she's the lightweight people seem to fashion her, she'll fade into bolivian.

The typo gave me a chuckle

[DaddyTorgo]

JPhillips - you think Palin (win or lose) will be a Presidential hopeful? I guess I just really don't see that *cringes at the thought*.

[JPhillips]

I think if McCain wins she'll definitely run in four or eight years. If McCain loses it's less likely she'll win, but she's ambitious and has a powerful part of the party behind her, so I'd expect her to give national office at least more more shot.

[DaddyTorgo]

aaaah the wingnut part of the party

[Dutch]

Finally, the Associated Press is getting serious about the issues now.

• Poll: Voters prefer Obama as football-watching buddy
Poll: Obama tops McCain as football-watching buddy
By ALAN FRAM, Associated Press Writer Fri Sep 19, 6:46 AM ET



WASHINGTON - People would rather watch a football game with Barack Obama than with John McCain — but by barely the length of a football.

Way to go, AP and Yahoo for sticking to the issues. Of course, with the 3 point margin of error, this may not even be true seeing how Obama only won this poll 50-47, but what's accuracy in reporting these days? We've got an election to win.



BARACK OBAMA FOR PREZ
Because he can hold a football better than John Kerry.
ROCK THE VOTE!

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTefNYyt...all_SJaffe.jpg

[albionmoonlight]

If Obama Wins:

I think, had Palin not been tapped, she would be more likely to be a serious contender in the future. She would have had the next 4-8 years to start doing the kinds of national and presidental things that governors do when they plan to run for president.

Depending on how this campaign goes, she might end up making it less likely that she gets a chance to run for predisent in 4 or 8 years. She could commit the kind of gaffe or get hit with the kind of slander that makes a recovery impossible.

That said, McCain was smart to pick her, and she was smart to accept. She makes it more likely that he will win. And, from her perspective, a ~50% chance of being VP (and the clear front runner for the next presidental nomination) is way better than whatever chance she would have had had she stayed in Alaska and kept her nose to the grindstone.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

The typo gave me a chuckle

It was intentional. Mike Tyson will never make saying it any other way the same again.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by Dutch

BARACK OBAMA FOR PREZ
Because he can hold a football better than John Kerry.

Well, if that was the standard, then my grandma would be president

[Young Drachma]

Bobby Jindal has a much brighter future in '12 than Sarah Palin does. She's having problems in the media in her first month, no way she can last four years after being on the ticket AND beat the Brown Reagan at her own game four years from now.

She'll resurface, but no way in a national office.

[ISiddiqui]

Jindal has his own stuff (the exorcism story), but it hasn't really come out because he's still Gov of Louisiana.

[lungs]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Finally, the Associated Press is getting serious about the issues now.



Way to go, AP and Yahoo for sticking to the issues. Of course, with the 3 point margin of error, this may not even be true seeing how Obama only won this poll 50-47, but what's accuracy in reporting these days? We've got an election to win.



BARACK OBAMA FOR PREZ
Because he can hold a football better than John Kerry.
ROCK THE VOTE!

[IMG]http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0WTefNYytNIHl4AIm2jzbkF/SIG=13oa81e3u/EXP=1221925848/**http%3A//content.clearchannel.com/Photos/gov_photos/Election2004/kerry/kerry_fears_football_SJaffe.jpg[/IMG]

How fitting that the lefty is a lefty.

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

You do understand that the person at the top of the Democratic ticket has the thinnest political resume of any major party nominee in 68 years, right?

So didn't Abe Lincoln among others.

[Kodos]

So every story has to be hard news? They can't do both?

By all means, we should be paying more attention to her efforts to thwart the investigation in Troopergate.

[Flasch186]

dont get me started.

[albionmoonlight]

Obama has to be somewhat concerned that, even with one of his largest national leads right now, Ohio is pretty much a toss-up. I can't see November being better for him than right now. And any movement toward McCain probably paints Ohio red.

[JPhillips]

I'm not sure he can win Ohio. I said a while back that the more likely path to the White House is through Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado.

[larrymcg421]

National polls...

Gallup (RV) - Obama 49-44
Hotline/FD (RV) - Obama 45-44
Rasmussen (LV) - Tied 48-48
Battleground (LV) - Tied 47-47

State polls

Marist (LV)

MI: Obama 52-43
OH: Obama 47-45
PA: Obama 49-44

Rasmussen (LV)

IN: McCain 49-47

[digamma]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Palin will get tired of the lifestyle.

The Palins are swingers? I hadn't read that.

[ace1914]

What does GOP actually stand for?

Grand Old Party
or
Government of the People?

I'm asking in all seriousness.

[ISiddiqui]

Grand Old Party