FacebookTwitter
Hatrack River Forum   
my profile login | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Hatrack River Forum » Active Forums » Books, Films, Food and Culture » Presidential General Election News & Discussion Center (Page 45)

  This topic comprises 68 pages: 1  2  3  ...  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  ...  66  67  68   
Author Topic: Presidential General Election News & Discussion Center
Irami Osei-Frimpong
Member
Member # 2229

 - posted      Profile for Irami Osei-Frimpong   Email Irami Osei-Frimpong         Edit/Delete Post 
Nice work, Lehrer. Both candidates are bad about talking about cutting spending, it requires ticking people off, but Obama is just abysmal. I think Obama will pick up for the rest of the debate, but the first third showed McCain as more fiscally responsible.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
I wish Obama would stop focusing on the start of the Iraq war. McCain rightly called him out that the current issue is how to get out of Iraq and Obama has dodged it so far. Bleh...

EDIT: But Obama has done a good job calling McCain on his bull.

Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
Was that Godwin's Law? "We can not allow another Holocaust."

ETA: It's kind of annoying that McCain's repeated defense against Obama regarding Topic A is that Obama just doesn't understand Topic A. Just make your point already.

Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
Yeah, that was ridiculous.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
How is sitting down with Iran equal to "they're doing the right thing?"
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
It's not. I think Obama is handling that point really well. McCain's argument against negotiations without preconditions was exceedingly weak.

EDIT: Augghh.... it's driving me insane how McCain starts all of his points with "See, what Obama doesn't understand is..."

EDIT2: And wow... McCain dropped a huge strawman mock conversation on negotiations with Iran. "Iran: We want to wipe Israel off the map | US: We don't want you to" (paraphrase of course). Ridiculous (like Obama's really going to be such a bonehead when talking with Iran's president).

Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 10495

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm sure that's a strategy thing, just like how Obama keeps addressing McCain directly as "John".
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Juxtapose
Member
Member # 8837

 - posted      Profile for Juxtapose   Email Juxtapose         Edit/Delete Post 
He does that when he's speaking to McCain. When speaking to the audience he refers to him as Senator McCain.

EDIT - Re-watching the debate, and I was wrong. Obama does indeed refer to Senator McCain by his first name while addressing the audience.

[ September 27, 2008, 12:22 AM: Message edited by: Juxtapose ]

Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 10495

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP         Edit/Delete Post 
Right, but it's unique to Obama. McCain isn't doing that. He only addresses the audience.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Irami Osei-Frimpong
Member
Member # 2229

 - posted      Profile for Irami Osei-Frimpong   Email Irami Osei-Frimpong         Edit/Delete Post 
Both candidates want it both ways with Russia. They want to let surrounding countries in NATO, even bomb happy Saakashvili and Georgia. To a certain extent, Russia has a right to be upset about our monkeying around in Georgia and the Ukraine.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
I see how using 'John' could be a strategy thing, but it doesn't seem negative, whereas using the 'doesn't understand' line does.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Juxtapose
Member
Member # 8837

 - posted      Profile for Juxtapose   Email Juxtapose         Edit/Delete Post 
I've noticed other politician's do that. I'm not sure what, if anything, it's supposed to signify.

And either way, McCain speculating on what Obama might or might not understand is a bit more annoying. [Smile]

Posts: 2907 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
America is safer today than the day after 9/11?!
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
rollainm
Member
Member # 8318

 - posted      Profile for rollainm   Email rollainm         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by vonk:
America is safer today than the day after 9/11?!

What about that doesn't make sense to you? You can disagree with him - personally I'd like to know how people come to that conclusion or the alternative - but it's not exactly an outrageous claim.
Posts: 1945 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 10495

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP         Edit/Delete Post 
The day after 9/11 all flights were grounded, emergency and military services were on high alert, and fighters were patrolling American airspace.

I think it would be hard to argue that it's safer today than the day after 9/11.

Safer than a few weeks after 9/11? Maybe.

Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Threads
Member
Member # 10863

 - posted      Profile for Threads   Email Threads         Edit/Delete Post 
That's taking things too literally.
Posts: 1327 | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 10495

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP         Edit/Delete Post 
I know. But I think that was what vonk was trying to say, what with italics and all.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
vonk
Member
Member # 9027

 - posted      Profile for vonk   Email vonk         Edit/Delete Post 
Obama's closing piece was exactly what I wanted to hear. America's sense of self respect and pride in the world is the most influential part of his platform for me.
Posts: 2596 | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
I missed the first half of the debate, I was at work. The last 45 minutes or so have been interesting.

It's hard to nail down a winner. From the last 45 minutes, I'd say it's maybe tied, but possibly with a slight lead for McCain. Why do I say that? He landed more hits, and did so in a manner that, for the casual observer that doesn't spend a lot of time looking into these issues, will be far more effective than Obama's rebuttals. I like complicated answers, and I thought Obama could have gone on even more at length with the problems of McCain's arguments, but I'm glad he didn't for the sake of the people he was trying to reach.

If anything, I think the story will be that McCain had a strong performance, and Obama held his own on what is supposed to be McCain's turf. I'll have to see the first half. I'll probably comment more at length later when I catch the rerun.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Sterling
Member
Member # 8096

 - posted      Profile for Sterling   Email Sterling         Edit/Delete Post 
Only saw the end. While I appreciate that Obama's strategy appears to be avoiding personal attacks (or at least the appearance thereof), the continued "experience" snarfing really calls out for a response about the responsibility for the current situation held by "experienced" men like McCain, and the worth of experience in people who repeatedly make the same mistakes.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
MattP
Member
Member # 10495

 - posted      Profile for MattP   Email MattP         Edit/Delete Post 
Obama pointed that out multiple times toward the middle of the debate.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
I'm watching the rerun right now, and I'm about 20 minutes in.

For the most part they've kept the factual errors to a bare minimum. McCain threw out the first one at 26 minutes in that I saw when he said that the last big Energy Bill had billions of breaks for oil companies. That's true, but it actually had a net INCREASE in taxes for oil companies, and I think Obama should have mentioned that.

One thing I really like thus far is Jim Lehrer's moderating. First off I like the format a LOT better than the last two elections had. It's slightly more freewheeling, a LOT less regimented in times and lights and warnings and such. He's trying really hard to push them to address each other, and Obama at least is responding. McCain seems reluctant to even LOOK at Obama let alone address him. I'm not sure why.

Stuff I like from McCain: Cutting ethanol subsidies. Corn based ethanol is an expensive mess. I wonder if he'd say that if Iowa was still up for grabs, and I suspect he would. I like what he has to say on defense procurement. It's a huge mess and they spend vast sums of money inefficiently.

I was a little spooked when McCain was talking about Obama being so far to the left that he can't reach that far across the aisle, because I made the same joke earlier tonight. I'm channeling John McCain...

Stuff I liked from Obama: I'm glad brought up his "Government Google" thing, because I don't think a lot of people know about it, and I think it could really change the excuses people make over spending. I liked his "using a hatchet when you should use a scalpel" line. That was crisp and on target.

More to follow...

Edit to add: I wish Obama would have slapped down that goofy line about the government controlling your healthcare. Has any serious Democrat with any real clout ever suggested that six guys in a subcommittee hearing get together to discuss your individual medical file and dole out treatment? It's a ludricrous hyperbolic statement that doesn't even describe FRANCE's medical system let alone what Obama and others are suggesting we do here in America. I'm sick of that line, and I'm sick of the people who are being attacked not slapping it down as patently false.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Destineer
Member
Member # 821

 - posted      Profile for Destineer           Edit/Delete Post 
It's good that both candidates are pro-nuclear energy.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scholarette
Member
Member # 11540

 - posted      Profile for scholarette           Edit/Delete Post 
On healthcare, can someone please point out that right now insurance companies are making health decisions, not doctors and patients? At least if it is the government, I can vote them out. I had a non-emergency surgery a few years ago and the insurance part was very unpleasant.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by vonk:
I see how using 'John' could be a strategy thing, but it doesn't seem negative, whereas using the 'doesn't understand' line does.

Referring to McCain familiarly could demonstrate, (as Stephanopolis suggested) that Obama is relaxed and unafraid of him. The fact that McCain has studiously ignored both the camera and Obama could make him look uncomfortable, in comparison. He, as far as I can recall, never referred to Obama as "Barack," and only addressed him a few times. On the whole, I think it made him look rather rigid. He also stuck to a larger array of key phrases and sayings, and showed the prep-work by repeating them a few times, including a couple of jokes he had rehearsed, and then maybe forgot he'd used them. With an audience that was told not to laugh, I think the smarter move was Obama's, leaving prepared humor out of his remarks.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Destineer:
It's good that both candidates are pro-nuclear energy.

I was absolutely in love with Obama when he talked about a plan to go energy-independent in ten years. It absolutely could be done, if we really committed.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
I guess my nuclear power post got eaten, but while they are pro-nuclear, Obama is decidedly less enthusiastic about it, and for a lot of good reasons. Nuclear power has a lot of serious drawbacks that SHOULD limit our widespread use of nuclear down the road. I'm far more interested in wind, solar geothermal and biomass as a mid to long term solution to carry the bulk of our needs. And it seems Obama agrees by and large.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Orincoro
Member
Member # 8854

 - posted      Profile for Orincoro   Email Orincoro         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
I missed the first half of the debate, I was at work. The last 45 minutes or so have been interesting.

It's hard to nail down a winner. From the last 45 minutes, I'd say it's maybe tied, but possibly with a slight lead for McCain. Why do I say that? He landed more hits, and did so in a manner that, for the casual observer that doesn't spend a lot of time looking into these issues, will be far more effective than Obama's rebuttals. I like complicated answers, and I thought Obama could have gone on even more at length with the problems of McCain's arguments, but I'm glad he didn't for the sake of the people he was trying to reach.

If anything, I think the story will be that McCain had a strong performance, and Obama held his own on what is supposed to be McCain's turf. I'll have to see the first half. I'll probably comment more at length later when I catch the rerun.

The first 45 minutes were largely to do with the economy, and Obama owned it. You notice later in the debate, on the foreign policy front, McCain starts name dropping and bringing up a lot of personal stories and personal experiences, which Obama obviously can't have- none of that was true in the first 45 minutes or so.


I want to say that it is one thing for McCain to point out all the experiences he's had and the issues he has dealt with in his career, but bringing up stories in which veterans, or in this cas veteran's mothers say "don't let this death be meaningless... etc" is tactless and, I think, misleading. It could hardly be surprising that soldiers and parents of dead soldiers who meet with McCain would express such things to him- and when they do, I don't think that should be used as moral authority for his positions on the war in Iraq. Anybody who loses a family member searches for meaning, and anyone who is fighting in a war, as Lyrhawn related in a different thread (about his brother), may want very much to believe in the cause or to make it a cause worth fighting for. However, the support of soldiers for war is not a justification for war, and it is not moral authority for a commander in chief to put them in harm's way, even if they are asking for it. When John McCain told a similar story to Jon Stewart, Stewart quite appropriately called him on it, and pretty much blew up at McCain over McCain's exploitation of stories such as these.

Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
BlackBlade
Member
Member # 8376

 - posted      Profile for BlackBlade   Email BlackBlade         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Mucus:
quote:
Originally posted by BlackBlade:
Maybe that's why I said English needs a gender neutral term. I'm so used to having one when I speak Chinese.

It is weird actually, since I learned Cantonese first before learning Mandarin, I thought it was pretty weird when they said that spoken Mandarin doesn't normally use a specific he/she. Only then I noticed that spoken Cantonese didn't do it either. Its like a cultural blind spot that you don't notice until someone points it out.
mm! [Big Grin]

edit: As for the debates, alot of talking heads are saying, "A tie = Obama won." I'm not sure that's necessarily true, and the reason I just came up with somehow fled my head while I was typing this sentence. It must have not been a very good one.

As for calling Mr. McCain, "John." I've seen a few politicians do it. President Bush back in 2000 annoyed me with his constant attempts to interrupt Mr. McCain in debates with, "John, John, John, Juh Juh, John." I could be wrong but I think Mr. McCain called Bush George just as often. I'll have to look that up.

It's unfortunate that Mr. Obama stutters in debates. I think it's a function of him VERY carefully selecting his words on the fly. But it makes him sound alittle weak when he really isn't. It's especially noticeable when he attempts to forcefully attack somebody. I was glad he called Mr. McCain out on several remarks, but I wish he could do it a bit more rhythmically like say Chris Rock minus the swearing.

It would have been nice for Obama to be a bit clearer on "the surge," since he used the phrase, "Lets be clear" multiple times. But "clearly" he is opting to not extrapolate on it. Also it's a pity Mr. Obama attempted to agree with McCain when he could, but McCain seemed only interested in marginalizing Mr. Obama's accomplishments as well as Mr. Obama as a person.

[ September 27, 2008, 09:29 AM: Message edited by: BlackBlade ]

Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
closeyourmind
Member
Member # 5916

 - posted      Profile for closeyourmind   Email closeyourmind         Edit/Delete Post 
Obama also accidentally referred to John Mccain as Tim and Jim while also referring to the President as George Bush instead of President Bush. This probably won't hurt him, but I thought the mistakes pointed out his tendency to say things that he doesn't mean. And calling the President by first and last name made him look a little arrogant to me.

Patrick

Posts: 43 | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Cerridwen
Member
Member # 11763

 - posted      Profile for Cerridwen           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by closeyourmind:
Obama also accidentally referred to John Mccain as Tim and Jim while also referring to the President as George Bush instead of President Bush. This probably won't hurt him, but I thought the mistakes pointed out his tendency to say things that he doesn't mean. And calling the President by first and last name made him look a little arrogant to me.

Patrick

Arrogant to me was when Palin referred to McCain as her running-mate and talked about the Palin-McCain administration.

That aside, whether intentional or not, by referring to Bush as 'George Bush' instead of the ponderous 'President George Bush' had the effect of making Bush's legacy seem less than presidential, and by association, Republicans.

Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Enigmatic
Member
Member # 7785

 - posted      Profile for Enigmatic   Email Enigmatic         Edit/Delete Post 
CBS News poll of uncommitted voters shows 39% thought Obama won, 24% McCain won, 37% thought it was a tie.
CNN poll of voters (not just undecideds) has 51% Obama did better in debate, 38% McCain did better.

Both of those links have results of more specific-topic questions, too.

--Enigmatic

Posts: 2715 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
James Tiberius Kirk
Member
Member # 2832

 - posted      Profile for James Tiberius Kirk           Edit/Delete Post 
Theatrics continue

quote:
Friday morning, on CBS’s “The Early Show,” Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the lead Democratic negotiator, said the bailout had been derailed by internal Republican politics.

“I didn’t know I was going to be the referee for an internal G.O.P. ideological civil war,” Mr. Frank said, according to The A.P.Thursday, in the Roosevelt Room after the session, the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., literally bent down on one knee as he pleaded with Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, not to “blow it up” by withdrawing her party’s support for the package over what Ms. Pelosi derided as a Republican betrayal.

“I didn’t know you were Catholic,” Ms. Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr. Paulson’s kneeling, according to someone who observed the exchange. She went on: “It’s not me blowing this up, it’s the Republicans.”

Mr. Paulson sighed. “I know. I know.”

It was the very outcome the White House had said it intended to avoid, with partisan presidential politics appearing to trample what had been exceedingly delicate Congressional negotiations.

--j_k
Posts: 3617 | Registered: Dec 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by closeyourmind:
Obama also accidentally referred to John Mccain as Tim and Jim ...

Kansas City has a transcript of the debate up. I see Obama saying "Jim" when he is speaking directly to the host, whose name is "Jim Lehrer." I don't see a reference to "Tim." [Confused]

---

Edited to add: McCain also addresses the moderator as "Jim.":

quote:
Well, thank you, Jim. And thanks to everybody. ... And, Jim, I -- I've been not feeling too great about a lot of things lately.
-- Senator John McCain


Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Blayne Bradley
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
I guess my nuclear power post got eaten, but while they are pro-nuclear, Obama is decidedly less enthusiastic about it, and for a lot of good reasons. Nuclear power has a lot of serious drawbacks that SHOULD limit our widespread use of nuclear down the road. I'm far more interested in wind, solar geothermal and biomass as a mid to long term solution to carry the bulk of our needs. And it seems Obama agrees by and large.

Woah woah woah Nuclear power HAS NO DRAWBACKS. There's an entire episode of Penn & Teller that go over this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usg7-xbQOcM

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by Cerridwen:
quote:
Originally posted by closeyourmind:
Obama also accidentally referred to John Mccain as Tim and Jim while also referring to the President as George Bush instead of President Bush. This probably won't hurt him, but I thought the mistakes pointed out his tendency to say things that he doesn't mean. And calling the President by first and last name made him look a little arrogant to me.

Patrick

Arrogant to me was when Palin referred to McCain as her running-mate and talked about the Palin-McCain administration.

That aside, whether intentional or not, by referring to Bush as 'George Bush' instead of the ponderous 'President George Bush' had the effect of making Bush's legacy seem less than presidential, and by association, Republicans.

Wow, to me this seems like your just hunting for any tiny thing to justify taking offense. America is a country where we rarely use titles and calling people by their first name is generally considered friendly not disrespectful.

In a country where we have airports named after Presidents (Ronald Reagan, George Bush, John F. Kennedy) none of which use the title "President", where we have called seated Presidents and VPs consistently by nick names (Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter and Dick Cheney), where former Presidents have campaigned with nick names like Ike and Tippacanoe and we remember our past presidents with initials (JFK, FDR, LBJ) it hardly seems reasonable to take offense by Obama's leaving out Bush's title. Puhleeese!

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 124

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson         Edit/Delete Post 
All other strategy and considerations aside, John McCain wouldn't call Barack Obama "Barack" because he generally goes by "Barry." And calling him "Barry" undoes a lot of work.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
I was under the impression that he stopped going by "Barry" as far back as law school, and has gone by "Barack" ever since.

quote:
From Blackblade:
As for the debates, alot of talking heads are saying, "A tie = Obama won." I'm not sure that's necessarily true, and the reason I just came up with somehow fled my head while I was typing this sentence. It must have not been a very good one.

As for calling Mr. McCain, "John." I've seen a few politicians do it. President Bush back in 2000 annoyed me with his constant attempts to interrupt Mr. McCain in debates with, "John, John, John, Juh Juh, John." I could be wrong but I think Mr. McCain called Bush George just as often. I'll have to look that up.

It's unfortunate that Mr. Obama stutters in debates. I think it's a function of him VERY carefully selecting his words on the fly. But it makes him sound alittle weak when he really isn't. It's especially noticeable when he attempts to forcefully attack somebody. I was glad he called Mr. McCain out on several remarks, but I wish he could do it a bit more rhythmically like say Chris Rock minus the swearing.

It would have been nice for Obama to be a bit clearer on "the surge," since he used the phrase, "Lets be clear" multiple times. But "clearly" he is opting to not extrapolate on it. Also it's a pity Mr. Obama attempted to agree with McCain when he could, but McCain seemed only interested in marginalizing Mr. Obama's accomplishments as well as Mr. Obama as a person.

I'm loathe to disagree, only because so often I try to use logic to predict the outcomes of these things so often and find myself coming up short when real people get their hands on things but:

In THIS debate, a tie is as good as a win for Obama in some respects. Why? Because of the common belief that Obama might be great on everything else, but he can't handle himself on foreign policy. That's been a major selling point of McCain's. For Obama ti hold his own and in effect tie, it means that he's gained a ton of ground. He didn't have to pull ahead, he had to pull even on that specific issue, and if you consider a tie doing that, then it's close enough to a victory.

Technically it's Senator McCain, not Mr. McCain [Wink] . But I had no problem with Barack calling him John. I might have had a problem if they weren't coworkers doing the same job, and I expect that Joe Biden won't call Governor Palin "Sarah" and she won't call him him "Joe," but Obama and McCain work together, and are on equal footing. I doubt Obama calls him Senator McCain to his face when they're in a back room discussing something, that'd be awkwardly formal. I don't think it was a sign of disrespect.

As someone who has repeatedly brought up Obama's stutters before, I have to say I was soundly impressed by the sharp downtick in stutters and uhms. I think he came across as cool and collected, and while there were a couple stutters when he was revving up, once he got going he went full bore just fine. A lot of that was probably his debate prep showing, but actually I think a lot of that was a genuine improvement in his debating and off the cuff speaking skills that comes as a result of the 16,000 debates he had in the primary.

The whole agreeing with McCain so much is a sketchy one. Personally I liked it, because I think it's absolutely silly to disagree just to disagree. If someone says something you agree with, don't try and disagree just to draw a contrast, say you agree and then point out the REAL distinction in positions, and if there isn't one, move on! I know that Republicans will take that and run with it, and that's the risk Obama took, but compared to McCain's hostility, I think it came off well. I think in general it'll look better to women than men, which probably plays to his strength. I think men look for declarative positions whereas women will like his demeanor better than the hostility they might have gleaned from McCain.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Javert
Member
Member # 3076

 - posted      Profile for Javert   Email Javert         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by ClaudiaTherese:
quote:
Originally posted by closeyourmind:
Obama also accidentally referred to John Mccain as Tim and Jim ...

Kansas City has a transcript of the debate up. I see Obama saying "Jim" when he is speaking directly to the host, whose name is "Jim Lehrer." I don't see a reference to "Tim." [Confused]

---

Edited to add: McCain also addresses the moderator as "Jim.":

quote:
Well, thank you, Jim. And thanks to everybody. ... And, Jim, I -- I've been not feeling too great about a lot of things lately.
-- Senator John McCain


If I remember correctly, Obama accidentally called McCain "Tom" once and either accidentally called him "Jim", or changed who he was talking to in mid-thought.
Posts: 3852 | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Cerridwen
Member
Member # 11763

 - posted      Profile for Cerridwen           Edit/Delete Post 
Something that I was unclear about during the debate was McCain proposing a spending freeze on everything but defense, veteran affairs and entitlement programs.

I was unclear about his position. Did he just mean other federal departments/programs won't get additional funds (i.e. the money you already got is all you'll get) or did he mean a general cutback on the federal budget to funnel more money towards defense, VA and entitlement programs?

Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
If I remember correctly, Obama accidentally called McCain "Tom" once and either accidentally called him "Jim", or changed who he was talking to in mid-thought.
There is one place in the debate where Obama has been talking about Tom Coburn and he then says "Tom -- of John". It's not clear in the transcript whether he has made a slip of the tongue and called McCain, "Tom" or is the statement is meant to apply to both Coburn and McCain.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Rabbit
Member
Member # 671

 - posted      Profile for The Rabbit   Email The Rabbit         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
You know, we spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don't know if that was a criminal issue or a paternal issue, but the fact is that it was $3 million of our taxpayers' money. And it has got to be brought under control.
This sort of statement really pisses me off. First off, this sort of study wasn't either a criminal issue or a paternal issue, its an endangered species issue. The study was done to determine whether there was enough genetic diversity in the bear population to be confident of the bears' survival as well as to determine how genetically isolated the bears of the greater yellowstone ecosystem are from bears in Glacier and the Canadian Rockies. This was part of the work being done to determine whether the Grizzly bear could be delisted. It was important scientific work not some boondoggle pork that was wasting the tax payers money.

I see this over and over again. Politicians stumping for budget cuts and decrying government waste pick out scientific research projects that constitute less than 0.001 % of the federal budget to make fun of either because they are scientifically illiterate or because or they are confident that 99% of Americans don't know enough science to know why its important.

I don't know whether this particular project was a line item in the budget or a project approved by one of the funding agencies. There are lots of problems with research projects that get approved at the line item budget level and I'd much rather see that money put into places like the NSF where the proposals are subject to scientific review rather than political review. Nonetheless, there are valid scientific and societal reasons for studying Grizzly Bear DNA that should be understood. It's find to debate whether or not protecting the Grizzly Bear should be a something paid for the Federal Government. It's fine to discuss whether or not a DNA study is an important contribution to protecting the bears. What gets my goat, is those who choose this as an example of government waste solely because they don't have the scientific literacy to understand why it isn't a joke and the politicians who cater to their ignorance.

Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Cerridwen
Member
Member # 11763

 - posted      Profile for Cerridwen           Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Originally posted by The Rabbit:
quote:
You know, we spent $3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. I don't know if that was a criminal issue or a paternal issue, but the fact is that it was $3 million of our taxpayers' money. And it has got to be brought under control.
This sort of statement really pisses me off. First off, this sort of study wasn't either a criminal issue or a paternal issue, its an endangered species issue. The study was done to determine whether there was enough genetic diversity in the bear population to be confident of the bears' survival as well as to determine how genetically isolated the bears of the greater yellowstone ecosystem are from bears in Glacier and the Canadian Rockies. This was part of the work being done to determine whether the Grizzly bear could be delisted. It was important scientific work not some boondoggle pork that was wasting the tax payers money.

I see this over and over again. Politicians stumping for budget cuts and decrying government waste pick out scientific research projects that constitute less than 0.001 % of the federal budget to make fun of either because they are scientifically illiterate or because or they are confident that 99% of Americans don't know enough science to know why its important.

I don't know whether this particular project was a line item in the budget or a project approved by one of the funding agencies. There are lots of problems with research projects that get approved at the line item budget level and I'd much rather see that money put into places like the NSF where the proposals are subject to scientific review rather than political review. Nonetheless, there are valid scientific and societal reasons for studying Grizzly Bear DNA that should be understood. It's find to debate whether or not protecting the Grizzly Bear should be a something paid for the Federal Government. It's fine to discuss whether or not a DNA study is an important contribution to protecting the bears. What gets my goat, is those who choose this as an example of government waste solely because they don't have the scientific literacy to understand why it isn't a joke and the politicians who cater to their ignorance.

This "pork barrel" study was supported by Republicans:

quote:
Former Montana Gov. Judy Martz, a Republican and a McCain supporter, said the bear had been used to block the use of the state's abundant natural resources, when all along the animal was plentiful. She asked former Republican Sen. Conrad Burns to help secure the funding, which was paid for in part by add-ons and a $1.1 million earmark for the Forest Service in 2004.

Burns is the McCain campaign's chairman in Montana.

"If it is going to remove it from the list, it is money well spent," said Martz. When asked about McCain's stance, Martz said "unless you live among these issues it is pretty hard to understand what is going on."



[ September 27, 2008, 09:01 PM: Message edited by: Cerridwen ]

Posts: 21 | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
That bear thing pissed me off last night too, but I didn't have the time to look up what it really was and then I forgot about it.

To be fair, there IS some pretty stupid stuff in these earmarks sometimes. But a lot of the time, even the stuff that looks stupid is actually pretty worthwhile when you look beneath the surface.

Edit to add:

Looks like Palin and McCain disagree on Pakistan policy:

quote:
The governor got a more serious interrogation moments later when Temple graduate student Michael Rovito approached her to inquire about Pakistan.

"How about the Pakistan situation?," asked Rovito, who said he was not a Palin supporter. "What's your thoughts about that?"

"In Pakistan?," she asked, looking surprised.


"What's going on over there, like Waziristan?"

"It's working with [Pakistani president] Zardari to make sure that we're all working together to stop the guys from coming in over the border," she told him. "And we'll go from there."

Rovito wasn't finished. "Waziristan is blowing up!," he said.

"Yeah it is," Palin said, "and the economy there is blowing up too."

"So we do cross border, like from Afghanistan to Pakistan you think?," Rovito asked.

"If that's what we have to do stop the terrorists from coming any further in, absolutely, we should," Palin responded, before moving on to greet other voters.

Considering McCain skewered Obama on just that point last night, that might have been a mistake.

[ September 27, 2008, 11:03 PM: Message edited by: Lyrhawn ]

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
As for the debates, alot of talking heads are saying, "A tie = Obama won."
Without explicitly endorsing it, this is what that means: McCain is doing awful in the polls. Obama needs to gaffe big time or McCain has to be a superstar. You have to reverse the trend to such an extent that McCain recovers electability with the general populace in states such as Colorado, Virginia, Pennsylvania.

Neither happened, Obama wins the trade.

Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Darth_Mauve
Member
Member # 4709

 - posted      Profile for Darth_Mauve   Email Darth_Mauve         Edit/Delete Post 
One thing I noticed during a small friendly debate I had this evening.

When Senator Clinton was running against Senator Obama, there were many like myself who argued, "Yes its time for a woman to be President, but not This woman."

That statement, in my opinion, goes double for Governor Palin.

Yet I have never heard the same said about Senator Obama from any of his competitors. I have never heard "Yes its time for an African American to be President, but not this one."

Posts: 1941 | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Samprimary
Member
Member # 8561

 - posted      Profile for Samprimary   Email Samprimary         Edit/Delete Post 
I am just going to import a series of my posts into a Sam Megapost and I'm going to let it stand as a summary of just how good I think the McCain/Palin presidency bid is going.

quote:
I am legitimately baffled! People are telling me and showing me polls which cause my jaw to drop! Only 10% of the people polled in this nation agree that the debates should be postponed. TEN PERCENT. There are few statistical differences across the groupings. The highest group was the Republicans at a whopping 14%. What. What.

Think about this.

Put yourself in the shoes of one of McCain's GOP campaign managers.

Okay, there you are. You're analyzing Palin. Perhaps you have been prepping her for her next conference or other showing in front of the press. You are gauging her capacity to stand up against Biden in the vice presidential debates.

How badly must you be sure that would go down before you are willing to commit to stalling in a manner that 90% of Americans will disapprove of, rather than have her debate as anticipated. How positive do you have to be that Palin would be a disaster before you go for this option.

quote:
Watching these videos and reading her transcripts, it's evident to me that she's not ready for prime time. To put it more adamantly: watching those videos and reading her transcripts, it's evident to me that even her governorship is a fluke, a happy accident involving favorable circumstances in Alaska's uniquely pork-addicted political environment.

Her leadership in AK shows how she would make the presidency a fun modern version of Tammany Hall style rule-by-bludgeoning. A vacuous alternation between gorging, and keeping posts attuned through cabal. She's far from being meritless, but her negatives outweigh her positives. She's the exact description of the sort of person who can only get elected for terrible reasons. Her baggage is evidence of this. Troopergate was nothing. Even though Palin organized a defiance of subpoena in order to stall the investigation until after the election (something that would cause the Republican commentators to howl in outrage were it committed by a Democratic candidate), it was still peanuts compared to what would come out afterwards. The unearthing of her modus operandi.

She, on her own, does not inspire confidence in her compatibility and capacity to a federal post. She's being coached by a desperate squad of campaign managers and tacticians, but it's barely helping.

quote:
hahahahaha oh my god. oh my god

listen to this just ------- listen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7Q_7DpuQ3M

Crib time. Watching these interviews I get the impression that when on the spot, she cannot speak in complete sentences or even complete thoughts. At least Bush, when at a momentary loss, just kinda sits there until he reboots. Palin seems to to just charge on ahead with HEY I AM WORDS LET'S COME OUT OF YOUR MOUTH I HAVE FRIENDS

quote:
Kathleen Parker is a conservative columnist who does frequent editorials on NRO and is syndicated nationally by The Washington Post Writers Group. She makes appearances on Fox News programs and especially Chris Matthews.

She just exclaimed that Palin has to go.

quote:
Ever since John McCain named Sarah Palin to the ticket, it has been a given that she has energized conservatives, particularly conservative women.

So nationally syndicated conservative columnist Kathleen Parker's blistering assessment in the National Review Online today is sure to sting -- especially coming on the heels of growing discontent among other conservative intellectuals who had been "wildly stoked" about her selection just weeks ago.

Parker, after a scalding critique of Palin's readiness for high office, begs the Alaska governor to step down from the Republican ticket.

"Only Palin can save McCain, her party, and the country she loves. She can bow out for personal reasons, perhaps because she wants to spend more time with her newborn. No one would criticize a mother who puts her family first," Parker advises, pleading: "Do it for your country."

Palin has given virtually no free-form interviews, but her sit-downs thus far have provided critics with ample fodder. Until quite recently, those critics have been largely partisans. Republicans have not just stood by her -- they have adored her.

Parker says: No more. She has declared her cringe reflex exhausted.

"Palin's recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity, and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League," Parker writes.

"Palin filibusters. She repeats words, filling space with deadwood. Cut the verbiage and there's not much content there," she continues. "Here's but one example of many from her interview with Hannity: 'Well, there is a danger in allowing some obsessive partisanship to get into the issue that we're talking about today. And that's something that John McCain, too, his track record, proving that he can work both sides of the aisle, he can surpass the partisanship that must be surpassed to deal with an issue like this.'

"When Couric pointed to polls showing that the financial crisis had boosted Obama's numbers, Palin blustered wordily: 'I'm not looking at poll numbers. What I think Americans at the end of the day are going to be able to go back and look at track records and see who's more apt to be talking about solutions and wishing for and hoping for solutions for some opportunity to change, and who's actually done it?'"

"If BS were currency," Parker concludes, "Palin could bail out Wall Street herself."


quote:
CBS, CNN, Mediacurve, GQR and Luntz are all saying their data shows an Obama win.

Sigh.

I don't ------- believe it. The data shows an Obama win because these debates are, in the end, not about substance. To most people the specifics of the debate are only noise. They are looking for/responding to style. Tomorrow it'll be all about how 'mccain was slouched and didn't look at his opponent!' as opposed to stuff that isn't ultimately irrelevant.

I mean way to go Obama for apparently "winning" but apparently he knew he had to do this using some sort of scientific appeal to image marketing for the lowest common denominator. So the strategy was to a semi-gracious patsy, 'agreeable' to a fault, and let McCain sink himself.

The debates have been engineered perfectly into pablum.

ok that should do it.

Now just pretend I'm in this thread laughing at anything Ron Lambert says and you've basically got me covered until mid-october.

Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 7039

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn         Edit/Delete Post 
I haven't heard about comment about it, but what did you all think of the format last night compared with previous years?

I thought it was leaps and bounds better than previous more structured and restrictive formats. A lot of people might not have noticed the differences, but it was far more open than the last couple years. Usually it's a 90 second answer with a 30 second response and 30 second rebuttal. Last night was a two minute answer, two minute response, and five minute open ended back and forth. Amazingly, the candidates had equal voice time despite the restrictions, and I think allowing them to directly address each other was a great improvement, though McCain doesn't seem to have taken full advantage of it.

Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ClaudiaTherese
Member
Member # 923

 - posted      Profile for ClaudiaTherese           Edit/Delete Post 
Ab-so-lute-ly, and about time.

Jim Lehrer was fantastic. Apparently all of the debates are going to be structured to get the candidates discussing things with another like this. Good on the CPD.

Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Blayne Bradley
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post 
"Obama doesn't know the difference between a tactic and a strategy" --McCain

wha? Its a collaqial term! 90% of the time you can use it interchangably grrr, foolish git.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 68 pages: 1  2  3  ...  42  43  44  45  46  47  48  ...  66  67  68   

   Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Hatrack River Home Page

Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2