-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
The Official American Election 2008 Thread
- Thread starter The_Panda
- Start date
- Status
The people running the investigations were photographed at a Obama event, and were highly partisan during the investigation once she was named as McCain's VP.
Demon of Light
The Pumpkin King
I think the Russians are smart enough not to actually start anything right now. They've been jerks since forever, but they don't attack if there's nothing to be gotten out of it.
Um. Sure. Keep telling yourself that. >>;
That's the thing, MSNBC doesn't really hide the fact that it's biased. Fox "News" pretend they're balanced and fair, while it's clear to anyone who isn't a staunch Republican that they're just as biased as MSNBC.
They may not want to attack but it only takes one miscommunication, for a war to start. Russia has been on the razors edge many times this past year in a half when flying into Alaskan air space.
It's the truth, if you cannot accept that then it isn't my fault.
Actually if you look at their nightly schedule you will see that Fox News is actually less biased than MSNBC and tends to have less Partisans on such as Greta, or a left leaning ideologue matched up with a right leaning ideologue such as Hannity and Combs, now don't get me wrong, I cant stand Fox News just like I can't stand MSNBC. But when compared between the two, especially with their nightly programming, MSNBC comes out as more biased.
I actually heard it was non partisan. 0_o? 10 of them were republicans, 4 of them were democrats.
I'm also confused about it somewhat. The investigation finds her guilty, when will she appear in court? Will she be convicted? I don't know how this works.
If you can't respond to an argument in a proper manner you will be infracted. First warning.
I'm also confused about it somewhat. The investigation finds her guilty, when will she appear in court? Will she be convicted? I don't know how this works.
If you can't respond to an argument in a proper manner you will be infracted. First warning.
Well you have Senator French who was the Project Director of the Inquiry. Who said that it would be a October Surprise, who said there were problems in Palin's administration before the investigation even started.
Oh and you have him appearing at a Obama Campaign Event.
You have Senator Elton, who when a majority of the council demanded that the investigation being dropped due to lack of evidence. He refused and moved the investigation to early October.
He also gave 2,000 dollars to Obama's Campaign, and went to a Obama Campaign Event.
Then you have the Independent Investigator, Steve Branchflower who while was supposed to be Indepedent and non partisan, was seen working with Senator French as to who to issue Subponea's to.
Should I go on?
She is guilty, but the man serves at the pleasure of the Governor, meaning he can be fired at any time for any reason. So they basically said "Well we hate her so we are going to find her guilty, but she didn't break any laws so we can't do anything about it"
He can't.
If Montana, Indiana, North Carolina, Colorado, Virginia, and West Virginia are all in play this late in the election, and Michigan, Iowa, New Hampshire, and all the other swing states except for Florida and Ohio(and even those two will probably go blue) are expected to go to the Democrats, then you know there's not much hope for the Republicans.
Last edited:
scythemantis
Creepy crawly
Wow...this is the worst you can come up with? You're just backing me up here. The fanatics you're describing are still better for society than the worst possible stereotype of the right. Better a tree-hugger (no matter HOW whiny) than a gun toting warmonger. Better someone who hates their own country than someone who hates countries they have never even visited.
The terrorists, racists and conspiracy theorists are a trait of every demographic on Earth, so, moot point.
Stone_Cutter
Well-Known Member
I'm surprised at McCain, I actually thought he would run a better campaign... All of his ads have been nothing but personal attacks...
In your opinion really. But seriously, this has nothing to do with this debate, infact you started nothing but flame bate. You want to continue this type of garbage thats fine, do it some place else.
Stone_Cutter said:
Well for one both of them have attacked eachother personally. Infact Obama was the one that started the attack ads. And who can forget the absolute stupidity of weeks of 'ZOMG! 7 HOUSES!!!!!!!!!'. But saying ALL of his ads have been personal attacks is wrong, and acting as if McCain is alone in this is wrong as well.
GhostAnime
Searching for her...
so what's this about palin abusing her power?
It was ruled that she abused her power as governor by firing her ex-brother in law.
But whatever. It's not like this campaign even has a chance at winning anymore. There's 22 days left until the election, and with an awful economy, it's easily going to go to Obama. Everyone keeps using dumb excuses, but the fact is, this is just a different election. Over 90% of Hillary's voters are going to go to Obama, the African-Americans by and large will, the younger generation is probably going to stick it out in large numbers this time around, the Democratic party is riled up, lower and middle class Americans are, Hispanics are, and the Independants are excited as well. All these groups are going towards Obama. Even women are in favor of him. Men tend to favor McCain and like...army veterans. This election is not about national security, it's about the economy. Neither has a clue, but Obama has a large lead on that issue.
John McCain's a great guy, but Sarah Palin and his lack of understanding has screwed him over. The Republicans should have gone with Romney. They would have had a genuine Conservative and a person who understands the economy instead. After Hillary lost I went to McCain. But over time my bitterness has waned, and McCain's stupid choices has turned me away.
Anyways. My predictions? McCain wins 19 states (Idaho, Alaska, Utah, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wyoming, Nebraska, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Kentucky, and South Carolina. maybe he'll get unlucky enough that Obama can even snag some of those states.), and Obama has a landslide victory. Expect Hillary Clinton to be a Supreme Court judge, or whatever.
Last edited:
Well as we wait for tomorrow's debate, I did find a interesting article in the UK Daily Mail.
I've lost Faith in The Messiah
A article written by a Obama Supporter * Think Asa or Big Al * who was given the book "The Case Against Barack Obama" which I may add is a amazing book, from a investigative journalist that dissects Obama's Political life piece by piece, using thousands of facts and information that he has been able to discover over the past year, and laying it out in a skilled manner, while avoiding partisanship.
In the end, as the Obama Supporter puts it, he is still a supporter of Obama, but he doesn't believe Obama will bring about the wide eyed change that people believe he will do. That Obama is just like every other politician in Washington.
It's a interesting slap of reality, and a good read of a article, no matter who you support.
I've lost Faith in The Messiah
A article written by a Obama Supporter * Think Asa or Big Al * who was given the book "The Case Against Barack Obama" which I may add is a amazing book, from a investigative journalist that dissects Obama's Political life piece by piece, using thousands of facts and information that he has been able to discover over the past year, and laying it out in a skilled manner, while avoiding partisanship.
In the end, as the Obama Supporter puts it, he is still a supporter of Obama, but he doesn't believe Obama will bring about the wide eyed change that people believe he will do. That Obama is just like every other politician in Washington.
It's a interesting slap of reality, and a good read of a article, no matter who you support.
GhostAnime
Searching for her...
does anybody know either candidate's position on education regarding dropout rates?
Please explain to me how a book called "the case against obama" can even pretend to be non-partisan?
Mainly because it starts out clearly staying away from the smears, and even states it is not going into things like if he is a Muslim, or any of the stupidity it is out there. It instead clearly focuses on the facts of his past, laying them out one after another, giving the source for each, and even gives Obama the benefit of a doubt on many things. The book tends to keep away from any ideological agenda of "Obama voted for killing babies that survive abortions, so he is evil, we must hate abortion." And instead just lays out the votes, and a explanation of that vote. To give you a idea, the source section of the book goes beyond 30 pages, with nearly if not over 1,000 listed.
Don't just look at the name and believe that it is in the same vain of Obamanation.
Hell in the book the author explicitly states ""It's not that Obama is a bad person. It's just that he's like all the rest of them. Not a reformer. Not a Messiah. Just like all the rest of them in Washington." His approach was to do that, in to do it in a even handed way, and he accomplishes it.
Last edited:
^It doesn't matter if he stays away from the stupid stuff.
It's still a book against obama.
You can say that it is a well written book.
You can say that it is a well researched book.
But if you try and say that it's not partisan you clearly have no idea what partisan means.
It's still a book against obama.
You can say that it is a well written book.
You can say that it is a well researched book.
But if you try and say that it's not partisan you clearly have no idea what partisan means.
Is this a serious question?
You can be a Democrat and still be against Obama. And write a book against him. That's not partisan.
- Status