• We're currently experiencing a minor issue with our email system preventing emails for new registrations and verifications going out. We're currently working to fix this
  • Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

The Official American Election 2008 Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

BigLutz

Banned
The media has been acting like it was a gotcha question because of the awful answer she gave. Really? All of the newspapers and magazines? Besides being a fabrication, it's an utterly stupid answer.
The media was going to act like a gotcha question no matter what answer she gave. No matter how stupid the answer may seem, it limited alot of damage.

I don't think it wouldv'e mattered. Obviously no one can read every newspaper and magazine, it would've been a lot easier to just give one she read, but mention that she wasn't so narrow minded as to use it as her only source of news. look at that, I am smarter the sarah Palin. Of course i already knew that.
Well for one you are not in a pressured environment to think of a answer on your feet. Second that one magazine would be scrutinized and treated as your only source of information even if you said it wasn't. I mean my god how many weeks were we treated "Zomg McCain thinks 3 Million is rich! When McCain said he was joking and just naming a number off the top of his head?" These guys do not care how you preface it if they can embarrass you.

Well she was a very unexpected choise, and no one knew anything abotu her. Biden has been in politics a long time, so a lot was already known about him, and Obama has been running for about a year and a half, so hes gotten his own share of media attention spread out across the campaign.
Biden possibly, but then again how many times do we hear about Biden's son being a lobbiest who has influenced some of his vote.

Obama? HELL NO. Obama has not gotten 1/10th of the media scrutiny as Palin got. I mean Obama was in the race for a year before you heard one peep about Wright. It isn't until now that you hear about Ayres and that is after the McCain Campaign has brought him up. They are still mum about Pflager, or Obama ties to Rezco, or his ties to ACORN or his ties to Mayor Daily. To say that Obama has been running for about a year and a half so he's gotten near the same amount of media scrutiny as Palin has shows a substantial lack of understanding on how much of a pass that Obama has gotten by the media.

How about this, once the media en mass starts going after the Obama Campaign to release his own birth certificate to prove he is a US Citizen, then you can start making comparisons between him and Palin.

Obviously exxagerating.
Funny how mine wasn't.

Killing off states? i dont know if you've seen the latest polls, but 4 battle ground states now lean toword Obama, and the electorate maps now give Obama 264 out of 270 reqiured EVs. This last week has been such a trainwreck for McCain, that according to gallup, Obama hit 50. In october! Thats unheard of for a Democrat.
What happens in polls today, and what happens on election day are two absolutely different matters. Biden's Gaffs about Ohio State and Coal have done alot of potential damage, and has given the McCain camp mountains of material to run on subjects that are very close to voters hearts in several states.

ha, alright, lets talk about the debate then. No way did she win. At all. Skipping questions are not how to win a debate.
Then Biden lost as well if you want to play it that angle as he skipped several questions as well.

Here is how Palin won the debate, and it comes down to something that has been around since Nixon versus Kennedy. Biden like Nixon came off as knowledgable ( Again even though his knowledge was wrong in many parts ). But Palin like Kennedy came off more likable, and in the end, that is what wins debates on the Presidential level.

The campaign obviously doesn't trust her. They trust McCain to talk to the media, they themselves talk to the media, why did they wait so long for Palin to talk to the media?
Again you work for the McCain Campaign? And as I said, trust isn't given, it is earned. The Media was floating questions about her baby's f'ing birth certificate. You have to be partisan or stupid to think the media was going to treat her with even a ounce of dignity or respect at a time where they are going so absolutely insane to trash her.

Then why is McCain still issuing press releases if they're obviously only going to be twisted against him by the gotcha media?
Just becuase they are going to be twisted does not mean you do not continue to try and speak to the people. I mean my god even the AP has become a part of the "Gotcha Media" after this weekend's absolutely Partisan report about how Palin was being racist for saying Obama's radical associations show that he doesn't view this country like normal every day people view this country. There is absolutely nothing racist about that, but you have the AP going after her and losing a lot of credibility.

Like one pundit put it this morning. "Is this the AP or the Daily Kos?!"
 
Last edited:

Ethan

Banned
So what did you guys think of the SNL skits? Think they'll even make a blip in the polls? How do you expect tonights debate to turn out? What's McCain's best strategy to win the election? Is he really so tied as all the political commentators say he is? Is the Ayers connection going to hurt Obama significantly? Is it wise for the McCain campaign to divert from the issue of economy and focus Obama's judgement? Has he really diverted at all? How has John McCain suspending his campaign effected him in the polls?

Just a few questions to fan some flames.
 

Scizito_92

koledge graduit!!!11
@Babylon: I know you were just asking the questions, so I'm not answering directly at you. ;)

I just saw the SNL skit on the VP debate last night. That was the third right? If so I saw them all. (Clinton and Palin, Palin and Courik, Palin and Biden). I thought they were funny and may have some impact on the election. Most of the media already pointed out the flaws for both candidates in the debate, SNL just made it funnier... so probably not much.

I'm not really sure how tonights debate will turn out. I kind of forgot about it until about noon. :p I'll just watch and hope for a good outcome.

Now, as for this whole Ayers and Obama thing, I think it's absolutely ridiculous. I don't really think it'll effect the election much. Especially when people start hearing the truth. :|

If I found this easily, I'm sure it won't be long until everyone realizes how absurd it is. Obama - Ayers connection.

(You have to read all of it or at least closer to the bottom to understand)
 
So what did you guys think of the SNL skits? Think they'll even make a blip in the polls? How do you expect tonights debate to turn out? What's McCain's best strategy to win the election? Is he really so tied as all the political commentators say he is? Is the Ayers connection going to hurt Obama significantly? Is it wise for the McCain campaign to divert from the issue of economy and focus Obama's judgement? Has he really diverted at all? How has John McCain suspending his campaign effected him in the polls?

Just a few questions to fan some flames.
SNL skits? Probably don't have too much effect on the general public.
Tonight's debate will be VERY heated. I don't know who will come out on top, but harsh words are going to be thrown around.
McCain's strategy? There isn't one. There's no possible way he can win.
Ayers? It SHOULD, but as the media seems to overlook it, the American people don't seem to notice or care because of that fact.
The McCain campaign should do a duel role. Have McCain focus more on the economy, but some on judgment. Have Palin focus the most on judgment.
 

Kyogre35

First avy..no touchy
So what did you guys think of the SNL skits? Think they'll even make a blip in the polls? How do you expect tonights debate to turn out? What's McCain's best strategy to win the election? Is he really so tied as all the political commentators say he is? Is the Ayers connection going to hurt Obama significantly? Is it wise for the McCain campaign to divert from the issue of economy and focus Obama's judgement? Has he really diverted at all? How has John McCain suspending his campaign effected him in the polls?

Just a few questions to fan some flames.
They were as funny as...well they were funny...Oh and Biglutz good debating...and the others...good.

Anyway they were great..I'm (For the left I'm so far right I'm Liberal though I'm not ;)) so they were hilarious they were just poking fun at Palin and really wern't bad natured.

But something in the past few days has caught my eye.

Biden said in the debate that the VP doesn't have any control of the Congress...though it's the President of it...he doesn't know the Constitution >.< interesting....

Scizito_92 said:
Now, as for this whole Ayers and Obama thing, I think it's absolutely ridiculous. I don't really think it'll effect the election much. Especially when people start hearing the truth. :|

If I found this easily, I'm sure it won't be long until everyone realizes how absurd it is. Obama - Ayers connection.

(You have to read all of it or at least closer to the bottom to understand)
Wowowow....WHAT!! An unrepentant terroist that had connections to Barack isn't important enough to swing some voters..I think not.

William Ayers was involved in bombings in 1970-1974 like the artical said....and also said like it said "We didn't do enough" BUT he is and always will be connected to Obama

When Obama kicked off his State Senate run it was kicked off on WILLIAM AYERS'S FRONT PORCH!! They served on a board together and the Obama campaign said they were friendly...so I think there is a connection..I'm not saying Obama wants to blow us all up but....still he surrounds himself with Terroist (not saying he is one), FAR left liberals that hate America (Not saying he does), and of course Rev. Wright...so the Americans HAVE to know this and they should make the call weather it is important enough to matter...

Carlisle said:
McCain's strategy? There isn't one. There's no possible way he can win.
No way to win the election...or the debate...because still both are possible. All the Media in July and August said McCain had no chance so I wouldn't count him out yet.

That's waht I think atleast.
 
Last edited:

BigLutz

Banned
So what did you guys think of the SNL skits? Think they'll even make a blip in the polls?
No but what is interesting is that there was a Saturday Night Live skit about the bail out, about how some of the people who have these mortgages shouldn't have gotten them, or were buying them just to make a profit, and that the Democrats were to blame. Shocking I know, Saturday Night Live with out a socialist/left leaning angle.

The interesting part is that the skit got pulled off the website, and off any other subsequent website it was on, just days after it aired.

But Youtube keeps posting it, watch the original before Youtube/SNL/NBC takes it down again

How do you expect tonights debate to turn out?
Hopefully expect some fire works, McCain is much more experienced in Town Halls so he comes in with the edge.

What's McCain's best strategy to win the election?
Hit Obama on his toxic relations, and hit him hard, make people question if he is the right man to be the President. Go after Obama on his economic plan, taxing the rich and lowering taxes on the Middle Class sounds good in sound bites, but it will kill jobs and kill the economy. Attack him on that and tell the truth, tax cuts for the middle class are nice, but what good is a tax cut when you do not have a job?

Is he really so tied as all the political commentators say he is?
CBS and Zogby both have Obama within the margin of error now, in fact among likely voters Obama and McCain are tied in Zogby.

Is the Ayers connection going to hurt Obama significantly?
Alone Ayers is dangerous but it isn't everything. The Obama Campaign has been struggling for a response to Ayers and they haven't found it yet. The thing is you can't hang the rest of the month on Ayers, you have to hit him on Pflager, you have to hit him on ACORN, you have to go back to Wright, you have to go back to Rezco, you have to hit him on every Chicago Politician that he has helped and is now facing jail time ( There is alot ).

You make the story that this man has horrible judgment, and he does, but Ayers does not complete that.

Is it wise for the McCain campaign to divert from the issue of economy and focus Obama's judgement?
When it comes to being President the two go hand and hand. That isn't to say that McCain shouldn't attack Obama's dangerous plan for the economy. But you attack his judgment and you attack his plan.

Has he really diverted at all? How has John McCain suspending his campaign effected him in the polls?
Yes it's effected him in the polls but it was a damned if you do, damned if you do not type of thing. At the time it was the smartest thing to do. You had Democrats and Republicans calling McCain up to go and help Congress. In hindsight did it help him politically? No. But you have to wonder what would have been worse.

Suspending your Campaign. Or having only 10 or 20 House Republicans at the most vote for the bail out.
 
Last edited:

GhostAnime

Searching for her...
well i have to say Mccain's performance last night was one of his best.

however what did he mean by mandates on small business in health care? was he lying or what? i only remember obama having it on children.
 

Ethan

Banned
well i have to say Mccain's performance last night was one of his best.

however what did he mean by mandates on small business in health care? was he lying or what? i only remember obama having it on children.
I agree. We need some clarification. A few times in the debate either candidate would get the last word when they clearly wanted to discuss the issue further. Can we run through everything and get a fact check?
 

BigLutz

Banned
Well Holy October Surprise Batman! Apparently Barack Obama may have been a member of the "New Party" a fringe socialist party created by the Democratic Socialist Party of America. It was created to bring more Socialism Rule to the Democratic Party because it was seen as too centrist and moderate.

A link to the Web Archive version of the New Party's 1996 website shows Barack Obama's name listed.

http://web.archive.org/web/20010306031216/www.newparty.org/up9610.html

Illinois: Three NP-members won Democratic primaries last Spring and face off against Republican opponents on election day: Danny Davis (U.S. House), Barack Obama (State Senate) and Patricia Martin (Cook County Judiciary)."

And here in a November 1996 Progressive Populist Article.

http://www.populist.com/11.96.Edit.html

"New Party members and supported candidates won 16 of 23 races, including an at-large race for the Little Rock, Ark., City Council, a seat on the county board for Little Rock and the school board for Prince George's County, Md. Chicago is sending the first New Party member to Congress, as Danny Davis, who ran as a Democrat, won an overwhelming 85% victory. New Party member Barack Obama was uncontested for a State Senate seat from Chicago. "

The New Party eventually failed after losing a Supreme Court case on "Fusion" when it came to votes. Where a person could run on two tickets. As a Democrat and as a New Party member. So that people would know who was the Far Left Socialist and who was the Moderate. After the election if the Moderate Democrat got say 1100 Votes, and the other got 700 votes then the Moderate would win. But under the New Party, if that person got 700 votes as a Democratic Party member, and got 500 votes as a New Party member, he could "Fuse" those votes together for a total of 1200 votes and win.

Sooooo... the MSM went crazy over Palin possibly being a member of the AIP, which turned out to be false. I guess we can expect the same type of scrutiny from the MSM about Obama being a member of the new party.

Yeah right.
 

Asaspades

Evil Monkey!!!
Hit Obama on his toxic relations, and hit him hard, make people question if he is the right man to be the President. Go after Obama on his economic plan, taxing the rich and lowering taxes on the Middle Class sounds good in sound bites, but it will kill jobs and kill the economy. Attack him on that and tell the truth, tax cuts for the middle class are nice, but what good is a tax cut when you do not have a job?
I think that's the last place McCain wants to go. The as things get worse, Obama only gets boosts. Gallup has him up 11 points now
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Gallup-Daily-Election-2008.aspx

CBS and Zogby both have Obama within the margin of error now, in fact among likely voters Obama and McCain are tied in Zogby.
Gallup, which is a much more accurate source, has him up 11.

Alone Ayers is dangerous but it isn't everything. The Obama Campaign has been struggling for a response to Ayers and they haven't found it yet. The thing is you can't hang the rest of the month on Ayers, you have to hit him on Pflager, you have to hit him on ACORN, you have to go back to Wright, you have to go back to Rezco, you have to hit him on every Chicago Politician that he has helped and is now facing jail time ( There is alot ).
Ayers won't be an issue. He's a professor at chicago university, and has recieved a citizen of the year award from the city of chicago. Anything even remotly hostile toword the US is almost 40 years old. Most likely those other stories havn't been run because of lack of factual evidence. Just speculation though.

When it comes to being President the two go hand and hand. That isn't to say that McCain shouldn't attack Obama's dangerous plan for the economy. But you attack his judgment and you attack his plan.
I dont at all think that who you associate with impacts your knowledge and judgment on the economy.

Yes it's effected him in the polls but it was a damned if you do, damned if you do not type of thing. At the time it was the smartest thing to do. You had Democrats and Republicans calling McCain up to go and help Congress. In hindsight did it help him politically? No. But you have to wonder what would have been worse.
Suspending your Campaign. Or having only 10 or 20 House Republicans at the most vote for the bail out.
Well as we can se, the smartest move wouldv'e been to just continue campaigning as Obama did. Obama got a nice boost, and people saw McCain suspending his campign as to drastic and reactionary.
 

BigLutz

Banned
I think that's the last place McCain wants to go. The as things get worse, Obama only gets boosts. Gallup has him up 11 points now
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Gallup-Daily-Election-2008.aspx
Yeah and Hotline has him within 1, Gallup within 2, CBS by 3. Which seems to be indicative of a tightening race, something its expected to do.

And as I have said OVER and OVER again, that a poll right now, is not indicative of what will happen on Election Day. Hell thanks to oversampling of democrats and the Bradley effect. A poll on election day isn't indicative of the final product.

Gallup, which is a much more accurate source, has him up 11.
You forgot to add "In your opinion" and any poll having him up 11, isn't a accurate source. That should be painfully clear now after the multiple Near or At "Double Digit" leads Obama has had at one time or the other that have been false.

Ayers won't be an issue. He's a professor at chicago university, and has recieved a citizen of the year award from the city of chicago. Anything even remotly hostile toword the US is almost 40 years old. Most likely those other stories havn't been run because of lack of factual evidence. Just speculation though.
Funny, you say anything even remotely hostile toward the US is almost 40 years old? What about on 9/11/01 when he said that he didn't think they set enough bombs?

Just because Chicago University gave him a job, and the City of Chicago gave him a award, does not wash away his sins, nor does it make him any less of a terrorist. Osama Bin Laden probably did a few good things for Afghanistan during his relationship with the Taliban Government. Should that make him less of a terrorist as well?

Ayres is a psychopath, he has mental problems, he hasn't repented for his days as a killer, he looks back at them fondly. Trying to gloss over that as YOU have, is a slap in the face to the people that Ayres killed, the families of those that were hurt by the deaths of their loved ones, and to all of those that he tried to kill.

I dont at all think that who you associate with impacts your knowledge and judgment on the economy.
Seeing how Obama's knowledge and judgement on the economy will be based on advisers that he picks, then who he associates with and who he believes is good company does impact it.

Well as we can se, the smartest move wouldv'e been to just continue campaigning as Obama did. Obama got a nice boost, and people saw McCain suspending his campign as to drastic and reactionary.
Except as I said, if the Republicans only supported the measure by say 10 votes, everyone would have been screaming that McCain didn't do enough, and that he didn't show leadership in this situation. Again a damned if you do, damned if you do not situation.
 
Last edited:

Yogurt

Well-Known Member
I have to say I haven't been following the debates or anything lately. I did however, see the vice presidential debate. I think Palin was much more prepared than I expected her to be. Just a thought. But, I have to say, Biden seemed even more prepared. Palin just seemed like she was going in circles with the whole "McCain is a maverick". Well like I said just a thought. Feel free to discuss this more in depth ^^;
 
I watched the second debate, not much going on. It was pretty boring, and Obama just barely came up on top. His lead in the polls is starting to shrink a little, but he's still leading state by state.
 

GhostAnime

Searching for her...
i thought they both did equally well.
 

Asaspades

Evil Monkey!!!
Yeah and Hotline has him within 1, Gallup within 2, CBS by 3. Which seems to be indicative of a tightening race, something its expected to do.
Are we talking about the dame issue here? i'm taling about public opinion of Obama, gallup has him up 11 points in their dailty tracking. We can argue polls all day, but i'm going to win. Like it or not, Obama is up, theres no denying that.

And as I have said OVER and OVER again, that a poll right now, is not indicative of what will happen on Election Day. Hell thanks to oversampling of democrats and the Bradley effect. A poll on election day isn't indicative of the final product.
Never said it was, but boosts in polls CAN be indicative to what actions voters are pleased with on either side. Obviously people think Obama is handeling our finacial meltdown better.

You forgot to add "In your opinion" and any poll having him up 11, isn't a accurate source. That should be painfully clear now after the multiple Near or At "Double Digit" leads Obama has had at one time or the other that have been false.
Wait...so by vitrue that Obama is up 11, the poll is false? Thats some real sound reasoning there. Gallup has been a trusted non partisan source for over 70 years, and was founded usong priciples of one of the worlds leading staticians. Not to mention they don't take any contributions from special interests or political parties. that's more then what can be said of CBS, FOX, or MSNBC.


Funny, you say anything even remotely hostile toward the US is almost 40 years old? What about on 9/11/01 when he said that he didn't think they set enough bombs?
I'm not quite sure what you mean, or what he means rather, by that statement.


Just because Chicago University gave him a job, and the City of Chicago gave him a award, does not wash away his sins, nor does it make him any less of a terrorist. Osama Bin Laden probably did a few good things for Afghanistan during his relationship with the Taliban Government. Should that make him less of a terrorist as well?
No, but it does show he is helping the community and educating the masses. I don't believe his class is how to make a bomb 101. He is contributing to society, and i find nothing wrong with that. Besides, the way conservatives are playing this up you might as well think the man himself is running for president.

Ayres is a psychopath, he has mental problems, he hasn't repented for his days as a killer, he looks back at them fondly. Trying to gloss over that as YOU have, is a slap in the face to the people that Ayres killed, the families of those that were hurt by the deaths of their loved ones, and to all of those that he tried to kill.
Do you have any proof he is a psychopath or has mental problems? Those are big claims. Also, I would like to know how many people he killed, because from my research, I can't find any numbers.

Seeing how Obama's knowledge and judgement on the economy will be based on advisers that he picks, then who he associates with and who he believes is good company does impact it.
It's not like he's going to make ayers a part of his cabinet though! Christ...how stupid do you have to be to think he's going to appoint some radical to his cabinet, let alone think to do it if your Obama.

Except as I said, if the Republicans only supported the measure by say 10 votes, everyone would have been screaming that McCain didn't do enough, and that he didn't show leadership in this situation. Again a damned if you do, damned if you do not situation.
I don't think that wouldv'e been the case. After all, the first time about 60 democrats didn't support the bill, and no one screamed about Obama for it. It just shows a lapse in judgment and perhaps priorities that McCain thought that was the solution.
 

BigLutz

Banned
Are we talking about the dame issue here? i'm taling about public opinion of Obama, gallup has him up 11 points in their dailty tracking. We can argue polls all day, but i'm going to win. Like it or not, Obama is up, theres no denying that.
For one no you won't win, second yes Obama is up, but saying he is up 11 points is absolute stupidity. The average right now is around 4 or 5, with polls hovering around there. A double digit poll so far away from the average is a anomaly, and should be treated as such.

Never said it was, but boosts in polls CAN be indicative to what actions voters are pleased with on either side. Obviously people think Obama is handeling our finacial meltdown better.
Democrats naturally get a boost when it comes to the economy. That doesn't mean they believe Obama is handeling it better or worse, and in reality Obama had a very hands off approach to the Financial Situation. His real contribution was starting a fight in the White House.

And while polls are indicative of what voters are pleased about, that does not mean they will be just as pleased one day, one week, or one month from now.

Wait...so by vitrue that Obama is up 11, the poll is false? Thats some real sound reasoning there.
Yes, Polls that tend to have one candidate up incredibly high especially in this election, have been proven false over and over again. The LA Times Poll, the ABC Poll, and now Gallup. All of them end up coming down just days later.

Gallup has been a trusted non partisan source for over 70 years, and was founded usong priciples of one of the worlds leading staticians. Not to mention they don't take any contributions from special interests or political parties. that's more then what can be said of CBS, FOX, or MSNBC.
You sound like you swallowed a freaking maueal on gallup. Just because they have principles and what not does not mean that every poll they put out is correct, or has been weighted correctly. When you look at the average of polls right now you will find them at 5 or 4, Gallup being 11 is the odd man out in that factor and has obviously missed on this one or two polls.

Here is my question, and one I doubt you can answer. How many Democrats and How many Republicans did they interview? How much Weight did they add on to Democrats? What were the Percentages?

I'm not quite sure what you mean, or what he means rather, by that statement.
Okay... on 9/11/01 the New York Times ran a story about Ayres, they had interviewed him. In that interview he said that he did not regret what he did, that he believed that they should have set more bombs and caused more destruction. That line of thought, that motivational is hostile, it shows that he still wishes to cause harm to this country. So to say that this man suddenly changed in the last 40 years, that he isn't hostile toward this country is a down right lie.

No, but it does show he is helping the community and educating the masses.
Doesn't matter.

I don't believe his class is how to make a bomb 101. He is contributing to society, and i find nothing wrong with that.
There is nothing wrong with that, but that does not take away from all the death and destruction that he has wrought, nor should it. You are trying to gloss over what he has done by pointing out something that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. Just because he teaches classes does not mean he is any less of a radical then he was in the 60s, and as I have proven with his interview, he is still a radical.

Besides, the way conservatives are playing this up you might as well think the man himself is running for president.
No but he influenced the man that is running for president, and is one of many toxic influences in Obama's life.

Do you have any proof he is a psychopath or has mental problems? Those are big claims.
THE MAN TRIED TO KILL PEOPLE.

HE TRIED TO KIDNAP THE CHILDREN OF SUPREME COURT JUDGES

HE ADVOCATED CHILDREN KILLING THEIR PARENTS IF THEIR PARENTS WERE RICH.

HE TRIED TO PLANT NAIL BOMBS IN POLICE STATIONS.

These things are psychopathic things, these things are not the normal activities of a normal person. What else do I have to say to get it into your head?!

Also, I would like to know how many people he killed, because from my research, I can't find any numbers.
Sgt. Brian V. McDonnel was killed by a Weather Underground Bomb.

Police Officer: Robert Fogarty was wounded in the hands, legs, and face, and is partially blind because of the bomb.

Diana Oughton, Ted Gold, and Terry Robbins were killed trying to make a Nail Bomb while working for the Weather Underground under Ayres. The Nail Bomb was set to be planted at Fort Dix during a Officer's Dance in a attempt to kill Soldiers.

It's not like he's going to make ayers a part of his cabinet though! Christ...how stupid do you have to be to think he's going to appoint some radical to his cabinet, let alone think to do it if your Obama.
Where did I say he would appoint Ayres? Post the exact sentence? No? I didn't say he would appoint Ayres, but I did say that Obama's long list of Radical Associations show he is willing to trust and be around these people. Would he appoint a radical to his cabnet? Yeah there is a very good chance he would. It wouldn't be Ayres or Wright, but it could be a far left socialist from his New Party group. Or some one from ACORN which mind you is a group Obama worked for and is under investigation for Voter Fraud in nearly 15 states. Or anyone else.

The point is that Obama has shown that he trusts these people, he trusts them to give him advice. As he trusted Wright, Ayres, and Pflager to give him advice on a multitude of things. So please do not expound the nonsense that Obama wouldn't put some one like this in his cabnet, because he has already shown time and time again that he trusts the opinion of radicals.

I don't think that wouldv'e been the case. After all, the first time about 60 democrats didn't support the bill, and no one screamed about Obama for it. It just shows a lapse in judgment and perhaps priorities that McCain thought that was the solution.
Actually 95 Democrats didn't support the bill, but since Pelosi was the speaker the Democrats could shape how the response was going to be to the people and to the press. No one is going to scream about the 95 Democrats because Pelosi and Company wanted to put the blame on the shoulders of McCain. They were planning to do it no matter what if the bill did not pass. But having such a staggering low number of only 10 or 20 Republicans sign on to it, would give Pelosi and Company tons of information to prove that McCain can't lead his own party, and he is supposed to be trusted with the country?
 
Last edited:

HoennMaster

Well-Known Member
I already know my Presidential vote, but others I don't know. The senate and house elections here in Minnesota are getting ugly. There is one commercial after another attacking left and right. So annoying. I can't wait for this to be over.
 

vivid_numbness

New Member
MY OPINION: If I could vote, it would be for neither McCain or Obama. They are both very heavy on the spending and want big governments...that's exactly the opposite of what I want. If we had more diversity in the senate then I think that would help the national debt problem, (more diversity=more argument, more argument=less unimportant bills being passed, less unimportant bills being passed=less money being spent) and if you look at the national debt of this country, then everyone would agree. OUR COUNTRY NEEDS TO STOP SPENDING MONEY. Which is exactly why we need a smaller government.
Barack Obama talks in his speeches about "more power to the people" and how "the government has less control over our countries actions" well...those are LIES!!! Seriously, don't let him fool you. I am a liberatarian, and if any of you don't know what that is, then shame on you. Look it up, and you'll be suprised by how much our policies and beliefs make sense.
 

chuboy

<- It was THIS big!
For one no you won't win, second yes Obama is up, but saying he is up 11 points is absolute stupidity. The average right now is around 4 or 5, with polls hovering around there. A double digit poll so far away from the average is a anomaly, and should be treated as such.
Do you think that if McCain had been quoted up 11 points on gallup and a Democrat said exactly the above quote, you would let it stand as a debate argument?

You sound like you swallowed a freaking maueal on gallup. Just because they have principles and what not does not mean that every poll they put out is correct, or has been weighted correctly.
XD You totally missed the point. If you are going to tell me that a neutral source is going to be LESS correct than one which is not independently 'funded' (ie Fox, etc), then you might as well give up debating now.

With all due respect, you can't look at the polls from biased sources and say 'those aren't double digits, how could your neutral source be correct!'

Okay... on 9/11/01 the New York Times ran a story about Ayres, they had interviewed him. In that interview he said that he did not regret what he did, that he believed that they should have set more bombs and caused more destruction. That line of thought, that motivational is hostile, it shows that he still wishes to cause harm to this country. So to say that this man suddenly changed in the last 40 years, that he isn't hostile toward this country is a down right lie.
According to 'what BigLutz thinks', I suppose.

There is nothing wrong with that, but that does not take away from all the death and destruction that he has wrought, nor should it.
Of course, I'm sure if this destruction had taken place during wartime then the story would be a whole lot different wouldn't it :rolleyes:
You are trying to gloss over what he has done by pointing out something that has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. Just because he teaches classes does not mean he is any less of a radical then he was in the 60s, and as I have proven with his interview, he is still a radical.
All extremists are dangerous, even extremist Republicans that blindly ignore any evidence contrary to what they think.

*returns to the sidelines to continue benevolent observation*
 

BigLutz

Banned
Do you think that if McCain had been quoted up 11 points on gallup and a Democrat said exactly the above quote, you would let it stand as a debate argument?
If McCain had been in several double digit polls in the past all of which had been proven wrong. I wouldn't go around dancing about a poll when the track record for polls that have reached that number during this election season have been horrid.

XD You totally missed the point. If you are going to tell me that a neutral source is going to be LESS correct than one which is not independently 'funded' (ie Fox, etc), then you might as well give up debating now.

With all due respect, you can't look at the polls from biased sources and say 'those aren't double digits, how could your neutral source be correct!'
Hey we have had various neutral sources during this election season who have gotten the polls just absolutely wrong. It happens, thinking that Gallup can supply absolutely stellar polls during this election season which has lasted over a year and a half with out a few screw ups, is absolutely stupid. Gallup got it wrong, it happens from time to time, suck it up and get over it.

According to 'what BigLutz thinks', I suppose.
No pretty much what the facts in the real world show. Not in the fantasy world you and Asa seem to live in.

Of course, I'm sure if this destruction had taken place during wartime then the story would be a whole lot different wouldn't it :rolleyes:
Actually no it wouldn't. If a Soldier during Wartime was caught setting firebombs outside of a Supreme Court Justice's house, so that their house would catch on fire and they would burn alive, or to place a nail bomb inside of a civilian dance hall. They would be executed, war time or not. Acting as if a Soldier could commit the actions that the Weather Underground did is insane.

All extremists are dangerous, even extremist Republicans that blindly ignore any evidence contrary to what they think.
Okay lets put a Republican extremist in here, lets say Eric Rudolph hadn't been convicted of the Olympic Bombings and the Abortion bombings. And lets say McCain was caught being good friends with Eric Rudolph as Obama is with Ayres. Do you think that shouldn't be held against McCain? That he worked with, befriended, and helped some one who has participated in bombings and killings of Americans?

I have never said All Extremists are not dangerous, we have plenty of extremists in jail that are right leaning, and plenty of extremists in jail that are left leaning. For a Presidential Candidate, some one seeking the highest office of the land, having messed around with One Terrorist, Two Extremist Pastors, and One Extremist Organization, in just the past 15 years. Shows absolutely horrible judgment.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top