Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I'd like to hear peoples views on what would happen to America if McCain was elected, and happened to die during his term, putting Palin up as President; Hypothetically of course.

Personally, I'm reallllly pulling for Obama, but as this is Hypothetical, I think that she would be impeached, if possible for a better candidate because she would just cause chaos.

Your Views?

Get the title?

vincent

Would frankly depend on who she has around her.

At best, not much would happen, things would basically go on as they had been. Perhaps she'd be reasonable enough to recognize that she'd be in over her head and just rely on whoever she has in the cabinet to make decisions. And we'd have someone as President that makes Bush look like a rocket scientist.

At worst, she'd not realize that she has no idea what she's talking about and she'd make disastrous decisions causing a nuclear holocaust. But she'd be kinda hot.

hottest president in the world.

I highly doubt anything would change with Palin in the presidential position.

Like BackFire said, it depends upon who would be in McCain's cabinet.

Originally posted by BackFire
But she'd be kinda hot.

Yeah, right up until the moment her face melted like she'd just seen the inside of the Ark of the Covenant.

I cant see her being any worse then Obama will be.

Then you should open your eyes.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Then you should open your eyes.

And accept Barack Obama as my messiah and savior?

Obama has done nothing to prove he would be a better president then Palin would be.

Originally posted by KidRock
And accept Barack Obama as my messiah and savior?

Obama has done nothing to prove he would be a better president then Palin would be.

It was a pun.

Thanks for playing, though.

Originally posted by KidRock


Obama has done nothing to prove he would be a better president then Palin would be.

While somewhat true in regards to actions, at least he doesn't come off as a bimbo when speaking, that should account for something, that is if you weren't so moronically biased against the Left.

Nothing would happen. The President does not have unchecked power.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Nothing would happen. The President does not have unchecked power.

While true in regards to "unchecked power", Presidents do push in which direction America points.

Originally posted by KidRock
I cant see her being any worse then Obama will be.

So, Obama gives you an erection?

Originally posted by Robtard
While somewhat true in regards to actions, at least he doesn't come off as a bimbo when speaking, that should account for something, that is if you weren't so moronically biased against the Left.

Maybe I wouldnt be slightly bias if Democrats didnt judge how good or bad a politican is by how good they can give a speech someone else wrote for them.

"Hahaha bush is a retard who cant speak!"

"Obama is awesome, hes such a wonderful Orator!"

edit: and i laugh at you getting upset over thinking I am bias against Democrats..this whole forum jumps on the hate bush and the republicans like it was Obamas cock at the county fair.

Originally posted by Devil King
So, Obama gives you an erection?

A slight chubby..but thats irrelevent.

You don't think reading skills and vocabulary account for anything, anything at all? Seriously?

Originally posted by Robtard
You don't think reading skills and vocabulary account for anything, anything at all? Seriously?

You dont think policy and experience matter more?

Originally posted by KidRock
You dont think policy and experience matter more?

I like how you always avoid questions, and nice red herring there. I'll answer you anyways, yes it certainly does.

Without looking it up, could you tell me what experience Bush had before his Presidency and what his major polices are. Of course not.

Her experience consists of governing a state with a smaller population of residents than the city I live in.

Originally posted by KidRock
Maybe I wouldnt be slightly bias if Democrats didnt judge how good or bad a politican is by how good they can give a speech someone else wrote for them.

"Hahaha bush is a retard who cant speak!"

"Obama is awesome, he's such a wonderful Orator!"



A slight chubby..but thats irrelevent.

Im sorry, how long has Mr. Bush been running for re-election in this campaign? Bush IS a language-mangling moron. But it isn't Mr. Bush's speeches that anyone is addressing. People are addressing Obama v. McCain and Palin v. Biden. I can't think of a single Obama supporter that has decied to base their vote on his ability to speak in public. If that was the standard then Mr. Bush wouldn't have been elected, twice. What is making a difference is WHAT Mr. McCain is saying in his totally understandable speeches v. what Mr. Obama is saying in his speeches. What you're actually drawing atention to is how unimportant a person's ability to speak in public actually is when considering how the people will vote. Sadly, your guy still looses.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Her experience consists of governing a state with a smaller population of residents than the city I live in.

Communist!

Originally posted by KidRock
You dont think policy and experience matter more?

Show us which ticket has more.

Originally posted by Robtard
You don't think reading skills and vocabulary account for anything, anything at all? Seriously?

I hope you dont beleive the context they say it in. Its difficult being a politician. They always make gaffes.

Im saying this because, I presume, and could be wrong, you might refer to the waffle about bombing of pakistan?

If you are then it should be known that Pakistan has allowed bombings on their extreme borders by their own. This because its an extreme terrain thats hard to reign over.

Anyway, would be interesting having a Palin/Obamanation.

Not sure exactly where you got that from, but, Kidrock was specifically comparing Obama to Bush and trying to imply that Obama supporters, support Obama simply because he can read text outloud without making himself appear like a dim-witted chimp (aka Bush).

But yeah, my leaders having the ability to read well or at least semi-well is comforting to me.

I was supposing and throwing another hue in the thread. Deeper in the subject n shit.

I do agree that Obama, obviously can deliver a speech better than Bush. The age gap serves him well. Kidrock is kidrock

Originally posted by KidRock
And accept Barack Obama as my messiah and savior?

Obama has done nothing to prove he would be a better president then Palin would be. At least he has better ideas.

Originally posted by Devil King
Show us which ticket has more.

Ralph nader, of course you probably meant between those two candidates Mccain and Obama, in which case niether have sufficient experience.

Originally posted by Robtard
While true in regards to "unchecked power", Presidents do push in which direction America points.

And that is a good thing. If her pointing pushes the US in a bad direction (Bad to most people, not just your opinion or mine), then she will not be reelected.

Originally posted by Bardock42
At least he has better ideas.


If you're poor or believe in Socialism sure he does. Obama Hussein Bin Iden are for the people!

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Her experience consists of governing a state with a smaller population of residents than the city I live in.

And with that..how sad is it that she actually has MORE experience governing and managing a state then Obama does..sad.


I wonder how many people were a part of that community he helped organize..

Originally posted by KidRock
If you're poor or believe in Socialism sure he does. Obama Hussein Bin Iden are for the people!


Nah, when you are not a war mongering **** and also realize that the American Health Care system is the worst (on top of being the most costly) in the first world then you'd pretty much have to take Obama over McCain.

Originally posted by KidRock

And with that..how sad is it that she actually has MORE experience governing and managing a state then Obama does..sad.


I wonder how many people were a part of that community he helped organize..

Though that would be exactly the same amount as McCain, right?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, when you are not a war mongering **** and also realize that the American Health Care system is the worst (on top of being the most costly) in the first world then you'd pretty much have to take Obama over McCain.

You're insinuating Obama wont start wars? Obama has said he would attack inside Pakistan.

And we are in a 10 trillion dollar deficit..is not really the best time to say "hey..lets pay for 300,000,000 peoples health care."?

Originally posted by KidRock

And with that..how sad is it that she actually has MORE experience governing and managing a state then Obama does..sad.


I wonder how many people were a part of that community he helped organize..

Though that would be exactly the same amount as McCain, right?

Originally posted by KidRock
You're insinuating Obama wont start wars? Obama has said he would attack inside Pakistan.

If it had to be. McCain actually says he wants to stay in a really expensive war.

Originally posted by KidRock
And we are in a 10 trillion dollar deficit..is not really the best time to say "hey..lets pay for 300,000,000 peoples health care."?


Or to fight a trillion dollar war....oh wait.

Also, you ALREADY pay more than every other first world country PER PERSON. If done right, it would actually be cheaper...and in Obama's plan it is not even particularly more expensive than what you have already.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Though that would be exactly the same amount as McCain, right?





So people can use the argument that Palin wouldn't make a good president and attack her all day, yet when someone defends her its "Well shes not going to be president! McCain is!"

How many years has Obama been in the Senate? I seem to have forgotten.

Originally posted by Bardock42
=


If it had to be. McCain actually says he wants to stay in a really expensive war.



McCain says we will leave when we are prepared to..Obama says we will leave right away, then within 16 months, then when the generals say its right, then we will send the troops from Iraq to Afghanistan.

Originally posted by Bardock42






Or to fight a trillion dollar war....oh wait.

Also, you ALREADY pay more than every other first world country PER PERSON. If done right, it would actually be cheaper...and in Obama's plan it is not even particularly more expensive than what you have already.

It will be interesting to see how we pay for a trillion dollar war and multi-billion dollars healthcare plan, wont it?

Originally posted by KidRock
So people can use the argument that Palin wouldn't make a good president and attack her all day, yet when someone defends her its "Well shes not going to be president! McCain is!"

How many years has Obama been in the Senate? I seem to have forgotten.

Nah, I was saying that the argument you have at Palin having more experience than Obama also means that she has more experience than McCain, because it just arbitrarily goes by the branch one has experience in.



Originally posted by KidRock
McCain says we will leave when we are prepared to..Obama says we will leave right away, then within 16 months, then when the generals say its right, then we will send the troops from Iraq to Afghanistan.

Interesting. Proof please.



Originally posted by KidRock
It will be interesting to see how we pay for a trillion dollar war and multi-billion dollars healthcare plan, wont it?

It would be. But neither of them wants to. Personally I'd prefer neither, but if I have to choose it would be the cheaper more useful healthcare over the very expensive and pointless war.

Originally posted by Bardock42

Interesting. Proof please.



Have you not read the news in the past 6 months?

Originally posted by Bardock42


It would be. But neither of them wants to. Personally I'd prefer neither, but if I have to choose it would be the cheaper more useful healthcare over the very expensive and pointless war.

So Obama doesnt want National Healthcare now? Cause I know you werent making the notion he would end the war and just have UHC, were you?

Originally posted by KidRock
Have you not read the news in the past 6 months?

Must have missed it. So, going to back up what you said?

Originally posted by KidRock
So Obama doesnt want National Healthcare now? Cause I know you werent making the notion he would end the war and just have UHC, were you?

Actually I was.

Originally posted by KidRock
Obama has said he would attack inside Pakistan.

just to be clear, McCain says we shouldn't "talk" about war with Pakistan, he obviously supports military action there, as he supports a "surge" in Waziristan.

lol, whats your take on McCain singing about bombing Iran in this case? Are you critical of that position of his?

Or do you somehow think that war in Iran is good but war in Pakistan is bad?

Originally posted by KidRock
If you're poor or believe in Socialism sure he does. Obama Hussein Bin Iden are for the people!

Or you know, have altruistic values

Originally posted by inimalist
just to be clear, McCain says we shouldn't "talk" about war with Pakistan, he obviously supports military action there, as he supports a "surge" in Waziristan.

lol, whats your take on McCain singing about bombing Iran in this case? Are you critical of that position of his?

Or do you somehow think that war in Iran is good but war in Pakistan is bad?

Never said I supported a war with Iran and wont unless I am given a reason to..once again, I dont like McCain.

But thank you for making my point. People call McCain a war monger for wanting to attack inside Iran, what makes Obama different for wanting to attack inside Pakistan?

Originally posted by KidRock
Never said I supported a war with Iran and wont unless I am given a reason to..once again, I dont like McCain.

cool, sorry to make assumptions

Originally posted by KidRock
But thank you for making my point. People call McCain a war monger for wanting to attack inside Iran, what makes Obama different for wanting to attack inside Pakistan?

personally, I see no difference.

other than to say Bin Laden is in Pakistan, but I'm sure we can think of better ways to get him/make him irrelevant globally than carpet bombing or invasion.

Originally posted by inimalist
cool, sorry to make assumptions



personally, I see no difference.

other than to say Bin Laden is in Pakistan, but I'm sure we can think of better ways to get him/make him irrelevant globally than carpet bombing or invasion.

So Obama is elected president, he suddenly believes Osama is inside Pakistan and we invade..this is sounding so familiar.

Originally posted by KidRock
So Obama is elected president, he suddenly believes Osama is inside Pakistan and we invade..this is sounding so familiar.

lol, what army is he going to invade with?

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, what army is he going to invade with?

The one he is commander and chief of maybe? Or maybe his "Civilian security force" brownshirts?

Either way Obama plans to cut our missile defense systems and reduce our nuclear arsenals..so war with Nuclear Pakistan should be great for us. Get ready to start hiding under your desk to protect yourself from the fallout.

Originally posted by KidRock
The one he is commander and chief of maybe? Or maybe his "Civilian security force" brownshirts?

Either way Obama plans to cut our missile defense systems and reduce our nuclear arsenals..so war with Nuclear Pakistan should be great for us. Get ready to start hiding under your desk to protect yourself from the fallout.

Yeah, I am sure if you only have 1 000 instead of 10 000 nuclear missiles, Pakistan is gonna **** you with their 5.

Originally posted by KidRock
The one he is commander and chief of maybe? Or maybe his "Civilian security force" brownshirts?

Either way Obama plans to cut our missile defense systems and reduce our nuclear arsenals..so war with Nuclear Pakistan should be great for us. Get ready to start hiding under your desk to protect yourself from the fallout.

Pakistan's longest range missile is 1500km (CIA says its only 1000km). They are totally incapable of going to nuclear war with America. lol

and America would destroy them in a conventional military engagement, much like Iraq.

The problem is that Iraq has, according to many generals and military analysts, broken the US military. Without serious consideration of a draft, America wont be "invading" anywhere soon.

EDIT: the site I found was a little out of date. Wiki claims the longest is an upgraded version of what I mentioned, now capable of 3000km. It also says they are developing a 8000km version. This is still far to low to attack America. As far as other delivery methods, Pakistan has some bombers, though they would have to cross the Pacific Ocean (with no aircraft carriers) and they have a single sub that they are trying to equip for launch.

Originally posted by inimalist
Pakistan's longest range missile is 1500km (CIA says its only 1000km). They are totally incapable of going to nuclear war with America. lol

and America would destroy them in a conventional military engagement, much like Iraq.

The problem is that Iraq has, according to many generals and military analysts, broken the US military. Without serious consideration of a draft, America wont be "invading" anywhere soon.

It would be one of the dumbest moves on could make invading Pakistan..but I think it would be possible without a draft.

Pretty sure we only had, what, 140,000 soldiers in Iraq at any one time?

With over 1,436,642 active military and over 800,000 reservists it COULD be pulled off, and by pulled off I mean we would squash their military eventually but then get into the same shit we are in right now with Iraq dealing with Guerrillas and suicide bombers.

Mainland US might not get nuked, but say goodbye to the thousands of soldiers stationed in the mid east right now.

Either way I doubt it will happen, but there is obviously a chance when words such as "I would be willing to attack inside Pakistan" are heard.

Originally posted by KidRock
It would be one of the dumbest moves on could make invading Pakistan..but I think it would be possible without a draft.

Pretty sure we only had, what, 140,000 soldiers in Iraq at any one time?

With over 1,436,642 active military and over 800,000 reservists it COULD be pulled off, and by pulled off I mean we would squash their military eventually but then get into the same shit we are in right now with Iraq dealing with Guerrillas and suicide bombers.

I'm just going off what I have heard. If those numbers are right, ya, I would agree.

maybe they meant broken in spirit? lol

Originally posted by KidRock
Mainland US might not get nuked, but say goodbye to the thousands of soldiers stationed in the mid east right now.

ya, a real problem. One of the worst things is that, with America's push into Pakistan, the people of Pakistan further dislike their government (this is getting better now that it isn't seen as a direct puppet) and it becomes more likely that a very strict Islamic ruler might take control.

Even if we (lol, I guess we works here, Canada is in Afghanistan ) weren't in Pakistan when that happens, it means serious problems for Nato troops in the region, Israel, and especially India. I'm not convinced anyone would drop a nuke (MAD still holds, imho), but totally a destabilizing factor in the region.

Originally posted by KidRock
Either way I doubt it will happen, but there is obviously a chance when words such as "I would be willing to attack inside Pakistan" are heard.

like I said before, both candidates want to attack inside Pakistan. McCain just doesn't want to talk about it.

Hugely Orwellian moment during the debates when he addressed Obama and said "You don't talk about this stuff out loud". He obviously will continue military action in Pakistan.

Originally posted by Vinny Valentine


I'd like to hear peoples views on what would happen to America if McCain was elected, and happened to die during his term, putting Palin up as President; Hypothetically of course.



Your Views?

Get the title?

vincent



I think it would be similar to when U.S. Presidents were assinated and the vice president took over. There was also the president who died (not assasinated) in office...I think it was in 100 years ago...sometime..I can't remember...

Most likely this would be one of those occasions when the democrats and republicans set aside their idiot rivalry and actually do something for the nation.

With all honesty...it's hard to say.

a country under palin? Well, take a pine cone, lube it up with icy hot, and jam it as fast as you can straight up your ass. now imagine that you are an entire country of 300,000 people. Kinda like that.

It'll probably start with another little reichstag fire which'll conveniently renew certain threats, destroy more rights, and lead us into another war.

Originally posted by KidRock
So Obama is elected president, he suddenly believes Osama is inside Pakistan and we invade..this is sounding so familiar.

See, there's a difference in your definition of "invade" and Obama's definition of "invade". Specific military operations and **** up the whole country are different.

Originally posted by inimalist
carpet bombing.

Well I think it's very clear what would happen.

Intel from inside the NSA would reveal that a terrorist attack would be imminent within the next few hours, with belief that the assault would be a nuclear attack on Los Angeles.

Palin would be forced to call in JACK BAUER, who unfortunately had been resigned from the Counter Terrorist Unit based in L.A, and hope he'd take the case.

This is the longest day in Kiefer Sutherland's life....

this is Season 2...of 24!

Originally posted by Quincy
Well I think it's very clear what would happen.

Intel from inside the NSA would reveal that a terrorist attack would be imminent within the next few hours, with belief that the assault would be a nuclear attack on Los Angeles.

Palin would be forced to call in JACK BAUER, who unfortunately had been resigned from the Counter Terrorist Unit based in L.A, and hope he'd take the case.

This is the longest day in Kiefer Sutherland's life....

this is Season 2...of 24!

Aren't they already on like, season six?

Originally posted by Devil King
See, there's a difference in your definition of "invade" and Obama's definition of "invade". Specific military operations and **** up the whole country are different.

So that makes it ok for Obama to start another war?

Originally posted by Devil King
Im sorry, how long has Mr. Bush been running for re-election in this campaign? Bush IS a language-mangling moron. But it isn't Mr. Bush's speeches that anyone is addressing. People are addressing Obama v. McCain and Palin v. Biden. I can't think of a single Obama supporter that has decied to base their vote on his ability to speak in public. If that was the standard then Mr. Bush wouldn't have been elected, twice. What is making a difference is WHAT Mr. McCain is saying in his totally understandable speeches v. what Mr. Obama is saying in his speeches. What you're actually drawing atention to is how unimportant a person's ability to speak in public actually is when considering how the people will vote. Sadly, your guy still looses.

does intelligence count for anything? while Obama was attending Harvard and later teaching law in Chicago, Palin was clad in a bikini and playing the flute in the talent portion of beauty contests.


let's see here.......on one side we've got a naval pilot who's claim to fame leading to politics was crashing and being captured, held as a P.O.W. and his beauty pageant contestant VP who has a journalism degree after attending several community colleges to fullfill her credits. On the other side we've got a man with a degree in law from harvard who taught law in Chicago with a VP with a B.A. in history and political science.

If I want to someone to teach me how to fly a plane or ride an ATV, I'll tap McCain and Palin. If I want an intelligent person to make intelligent decisions regarding the future of our nation, I'll go with Obama, Biden.

Intelligence does count for something.

It's counted as a net negative in this country. Stupid people vote for the person they can relate to, and they can't relate to someone smart.

Biden actually finished near the bottom of his law school class; I don't think that has negatively impacted his career. Dubya went to Yale and Harvard; I don't think that education has served him particularly well.

Attending an Ivy League institution isn't necessarily the be all and end all. That being said, of the candidates, Obama and Biden clearly come across as more intelligent and have more nuanced policy positions.

(On an aside, it's difficult to believe the assertion that Barack Obama isn't where he is now because of his (apparently) articulate oratory. On policy positions he doesn't differ particularly much from any of the other Democratic candidates from the primaries - it was his crowd-drawing ability and tactical use of caucuses that led him to nomination)

Regardless of whether a McCain wins, loses or dies, a Palin presidency or at least presidential candidacy frankly isn't impossible, or even improbable.

If she survives this campaign, she will probably be a frontrunner for the next Republican nominee.

Apparently Biden won the debate in the high 70%'s

I've seen something around the 60s

Originally posted by Evil Dead
does intelligence count for anything? while Obama was attending Harvard and later teaching law in Chicago, Palin was clad in a bikini and playing the flute in the talent portion of beauty contests.


let's see here.......on one side we've got a naval pilot who's claim to fame leading to politics was crashing and being captured, held as a P.O.W. and his beauty pageant contestant VP who has a journalism degree after attending several community colleges to fullfill her credits. On the other side we've got a man with a degree in law from harvard who taught law in Chicago with a VP with a B.A. in history and political science.

If I want to someone to teach me how to fly a plane or ride an ATV, I'll tap McCain and Palin. If I want an intelligent person to make intelligent decisions regarding the future of our nation, I'll go with Obama, Biden.

Being a law professor = the ability to be president?

To be honest, I think both of their running mate choices suck, but MCain is far more qualified than Obama for the position. Obama is a new face that came out of nowhere and the media has a hard-on for him the same way it does for other hollow celebrities. As for "change we can believe in", is he serious? He thinks he can snap his fingers and do everything he wants to like that? The only change if he is elected is a new Trivial Pursuit card saying "Who was the first black president of the United States"?.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Being a law professor = the ability to be president?

To be honest, I think both of their running mate choices suck, but MCain is far more qualified than Obama for the position. Obama is a new face that came out of nowhere and the media has a hard-on for him the same way it does for other hollow celebrities. As for "change we can believe in", is he serious? He thinks he can snap his fingers and do everything he wants to like that? The only change if he is elected is a new Trivial Pursuit card saying "Who was the first black president of the United States"?. What's the point in voting at all then?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
As for "change we can believe in", is he serious? He thinks he can snap his fingers and do everything he wants to like that?

Yes, he's said this.

I thought most, if not all prisoners of war sustained serious post-traumatic stress syndrome? Do people want a 75 year old grandpa who was gangraped by the vietcong to be president?

Good luck with all that.

Originally posted by Bada's Palin
I thought most, if not all prisoners of war sustained serious post-traumatic stress syndrome? Do people want a 75 year old grandpa who was gangraped by the vietcong to be president?

Good luck with all that.


....

Palin is quite the attention-whore

Originally posted by shiv
Palin is quite the attention-whore

*wink at the camera*

You betcha Joe Sixpack

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Her experience consists of governing a state with a smaller population of residents than the city I live in.

How many people has Obama governed?

I think that is possibly the lamest strike against her. She had dealt with border security, oil companies, and has the same duties as every other governor.

I know Obama has other experience, but in the grand scheme of things he is just as inexperienced as palin...maybe more so. And he is runnin gfor President...not VP.

Originally posted by Pezmerga
How many people has Obama governed?

I think that is possibly the lamest strike against her. She had dealt with border security, oil companies, and has the same duties as every other governor.

I know Obama has other experience, but in the grand scheme of things he is just as inexperienced as palin...maybe more so. And he is runnin gfor President...not VP.

Palin has said more than once she can't hold a candle to Biden or Obama. She keeps saying "I'm here for the people, to do what's right for the people. Screw politics!"



Edit: Excuse me, "federal" poltics.

Originally posted by Bada's Palin
I thought most, if not all prisoners of war sustained serious post-traumatic stress syndrome?

no

Originally posted by Bada's Palin
Do people want a 75 year old grandpa who was gangraped by the vietcong to be president?

if nothing else, one can probably assume the McCain family was capable of aquiring the necessary help for John if he suffered from ptsd after being released.

Originally posted by inimalist
if nothing else, one can probably assume the McCain family was capable of aquiring the necessary help for John if he suffered from ptsd after being released.

Have you seen his evil two thumbs up grimace? You become a secretive evil person when you go through something like that, as evidenced by his grimace. He's not even capable of happiness.






No, I'm not serious.

Originally posted by chithappens
Palin has said more than once she can't hold a candle to Biden or Obama. She keeps saying "I'm here for the people, to do what's right for the people. Screw politics!"



Edit: Excuse me, "federal" poltics.


My point is both have inexperience. Maybe not in the same areas, but like I said Palin is only running as VP. I'd rather have the apprentice as VP than as President.

And no that is not my whole basis for voting for Mcain, but it something I think is worth noting.

The difference is Obama obviously knows what he's talking about. He's smarter than she is, he knows more. He's not desperately saying that he has foreign policy experience because he can see Canada from the border.

Palins going through a tough Menopause

Originally posted by BackFire
The difference is Obama obviously knows what he's talking about. He's smarter than she is, he knows more. He's not desperately saying that he has foreign policy experience because he can see Canada from the border.

He is intelligent, and moreso than Palin, but that is irrelevant as McCain is the Republican nominee. I was merely pointing out that the experience factor is more questionable with him because he is the presidential candidate. Even though he has more knowledge than Palin, what has he done with the knowledge? Besides vote present..

I will reiterate that it is not the main reason I will not vote for Obama. That would be because I don't agree with about 80% of his so called "changes" when he is in office. I agree with 80% of McCain's policies.

If it's irrelevant why did you bring it up? You directly compared Obama to Palin, than when the differences between them are made clear, you say it's irrelevant? Make up your mind.

You should educate yourself on what voting present actually means. Go on. You sound rather ignorant when you lie and act like that's all he's done.

I love seeing the reasons people won't vote for Obama. He's intelligent, relatable to the people and has been in politics a long time, short time on the national level.

there's no way anybody can convince me that they truely see Obama and grandpa munster standing side by side and believe grandpa to be the best man for the job. just come out and say you won't vote for a black man. It's 2008.....but there is still freedom of speech. just say, "I'm not voting for that smart, uppity n-gger". That's all you have to say, we'll all understand your position then.

Originally posted by chithappens
Palin has said more than once she can't hold a candle to Biden or Obama. She keeps saying "I'm here for the people, to do what's right for the people. Screw politics!"



Edit: Excuse me, "federal" poltics.

To be fair, she both said (multiple times) "get out of my way government", you know, to be mavericky and "the government needs to step in and fix these (economic) problems now."

Originally posted by Evil Dead
I love seeing the reasons people won't vote for Obama. He's intelligent, relatable to the people and has been in politics a long time, short time on the national level.

there's no way anybody can convince me that they truely see Obama and grandpa munster standing side by side and believe grandpa to be the best man for the job. just come out and say you won't vote for a black man. It's 2008.....but there is still freedom of speech. just say, "I'm not voting for that smart, uppity n-gger". That's all you have to say, we'll all understand your position then.

Don't worry, you'll be hearing many reasons in the following weeks, from his Indonesian birth, him being groomed by radical 70's terrorist and being a naughty little 'pants on fire' liar, among a few.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Being a law professor = the ability to be president?

Being a POW = the ability to be president?

Originally posted by Devil King
Being a POW = the ability to be president?

Of course not, and whenever the Obama crowd tries to pull that number, he'll say to ignore his time as a POW and look at his political career.

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Of course not, and whenever the Obama crowd tries to pull that number, he'll say to ignore his time as a POW and look at his political career.

He tells people to ignore it? How? By bringing it up every shamefully patehtic chance he gets? Personally, I'd rather have a constitutional law professor sitting in the oval office.

Originally posted by Devil King
He tells people to ignore it? How? By bringing it up every shamefully patehtic chance he gets? Personally, I'd rather have a constitutional law professor sitting in the oval office. Look, dude, he's a maverick. Just accept it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Look, dude, he's a maverick. Just accept it.

I just can't. Considering how many fighter jets he crashed during the war, I can only imagine his superiors decided to leave him in the camp so he wouldn't cost us any more money.

Originally posted by Devil King
I just can't. Considering how many fighter jets he crashed during the war, I can only imagine his superiors decided to leave him in the camp so he wouldn't cost us any more money.

Maverick, Maverick, Mavrick, Ronald Reagan, Maverick.

PWNED!

Originally posted by Robtard
Maverick, Maverick, Mavrick, Ronald Reagan, Maverick.

PWNED!

Oh heck, sure, god bless ya. 'wink.

I give it two weeks before she has a 'wardrobe malfunction' and flashes someone.

Originally posted by Devil King
Oh heck, sure, god bless ya. 'wink. You betcha.

Originally posted by BackFire
I give it two weeks before she has a 'wardrobe malfunction' and flashes someone.

Oh, I hope it's me so it doesn't actually work!

And then a week after that she starts having sex with people for votes.

Originally posted by BackFire
I give it two weeks before she has a 'wardrobe malfunction' and flashes someone.

She's 44 and has had five children, unless she's had them enhanced like her face, a stunt like that will flop (like her titties).

Originally posted by BackFire
And then a week after that she starts having sex with people for votes.

Maybe in the next SNL skit they should just dress Tina Fey up as a giant talking vagina.

Originally posted by BackFire
I give it two weeks before she has a 'wardrobe malfunction' and flashes someone.

I'd vote for her

Originally posted by inimalist
I'd vote for her

Don't fall for it Luke!

lol

I said I'd vote for Bush if he punched Kerry in the face

see, I'm not partisan

Originally posted by inimalist
I'd vote for her No, you'd vote for McCain.

Originally posted by lord xyz
No, you'd vote for McCain.

I've got $60 riding on him having a heart attack during the acceptance speech

Originally posted by inimalist
I've got $60 riding on him having a heart attack during the acceptance speech

Which would mean you'd learn a new definition of pain and suffering as you are slowly digested over....four to eight years.

Well, we would.

Originally posted by Devil King
Which would mean you'd learn a new definition of pain and suffering as you are slowly digested over....four to eight years.

Well, we would.

ya, I feel unless she got real greedy with our oil fields (and lets be honest, we aren't Iraq, we'd come waving the white flags as soon as you hit the border) I'm safe enough

if you guys ever get that damn green energy, I don't know what the Canadian economy would do!

Not really a big deal, but she called Gen. McKiernan (head army guy in Afghanistan), Gen. McClellan, who was a union general in the Civil War. Wonder why they were cramming Civil War info into her for the debate though?

Originally posted by inimalist
ya, I feel unless she got real greedy with our oil fields (and lets be honest, we aren't Iraq, we'd come waving the white flags as soon as you hit the border) I'm safe enough

if you guys ever get that damn green energy, I don't know what the Canadian economy would do!

It's already feeling the pinch of this wall street plunge.

Originally posted by BackFire
If it's irrelevant why did you bring it up? You directly compared Obama to Palin, than when the differences between them are made clear, you say it's irrelevant? Make up your mind.

You should educate yourself on what voting present actually means. Go on. You sound rather ignorant when you lie and act like that's all he's done.

i didn't bring up the intelligence factor between Palin and Obama, did I?

Also I know exactly what present means, do you?

Originally posted by Evil Dead
I love seeing the reasons people won't vote for Obama. He's intelligent, relatable to the people and has been in politics a long time, short time on the national level.

there's no way anybody can convince me that they truely see Obama and grandpa munster standing side by side and believe grandpa to be the best man for the job. just come out and say you won't vote for a black man. It's 2008.....but there is still freedom of speech. just say, "I'm not voting for that smart, uppity n-gger". That's all you have to say, we'll all understand your position then.

This post is idiotic. So now I am racist if I don't vote for Obama?

Originally posted by Pezmerga
i didn't bring up the intelligence factor between Palin and Obama, did I?

Also I know exactly what present means, do you?

You compared Palin and Obama, and then backed away when it was rebuked.

Of course I know what it means, evidenced by the fact that I don't use it as a discredited and baseless attack on him; it's a valid way to vote on something, which many who are ignorant on its meaning don't realize.

Originally posted by BackFire
You compared Palin and Obama, and then backed away when it was rebuked.

Of course I know what it means, evidenced by the fact that I don't use it as a discredited and baseless attack on him; it's a valid way to vote on something, which many who are ignorant on its meaning as to what it actually means - I.E.: You.

Yes I did compare them, I said that I'd rather have the Apprentice as a VP.

As for the Present thing, I know what it means. It means no with a reason.... But well played, because everyone knows what everything means on the internet lol. So just sheath that dagger please.

Originally posted by Pezmerga
Yes I did compare them, I said that I'd rather have the Apprentice as a VP.

As for the Present thing, I know what it means. It means no with a reason.... But well played, because everyone knows what everything means on the internet lol. So just sheath that dagger please.

You said they are both inexperienced. I then said that's true, but Obama is clearly smarter which makes up for his lack of experience. You then said that wasn't relevant, whatever that means.

And if you know what present mean then why did you purposely misrepresent his voting record and imply that that's all he's done and that there's something wrong with voting that way?

Originally posted by BackFire
You said they are both inexperienced. I then said that's true, but Obama is clearly smarter which makes up for his lack of experience. You then said that wasn't relevant, whatever that means.

And if you know what present mean then why did you purposely misrepresent his voting record and imply that that's all he's done and that there's something wrong with voting that way?

I really fail to see how experience means jack diddly, for the most part, in politics. It certainly helps the voter know who you are and where you stand, regardless of your campaign rhetoric.

What else? I'm sure there's more reasons, but a longer list can be made for why being a new comer is better.

Palin= little experience at the national level and a dumbass that can memorize talking points. She's.....hot?

Biden=smart fella but just talks in circles and shits out supposed facts like it's his political diarrhea. Old...

and while we're at it...

Obama= little experience period, but far from dumb ass. My mother says he's attractive...so whatever. Empty promises abound and some of his proposed policy fails.



McCain=a**hole old fart who is rather underhanded and likes to fool people. When I look into his soul, I see the holocaust. (Debate reference for the win?) Some of his campaign policy fails as well.

I agree with you. I don't think lengthy experience is always necessary to be a good president. JFK was only a senator for 5 years or so before running for president, and I think most agree that he did alright.

Leadership is something you have or you don't, it's not something you learn or get from experience, you have it or you don't, and Obama has it.

Originally posted by BackFire
You said they are both inexperienced. I then said that's true, but Obama is clearly smarter which makes up for his lack of experience. You then said that wasn't relevant, whatever that means.

And if you know what present mean then why did you purposely misrepresent his voting record and imply that that's all he's done and that there's something wrong with voting that way?

Obama is smarter, but he is also running for President. She is running for VP. Big difference.

It can be percieved that he is just a fence sitter by voting that way. Which I personally think he is.

Maybe, but seeing as it more or less gets counted as a 'no' it's not sitting on the fence, it's voting 'no' but saying that you aren't wholly against the premise. It's still making a decision, it's not a 'i don't know' as it's often insinuated.

Originally posted by Pezmerga
Obama is smarter, but he is also running for President. She is running for VP. Big difference.

It can be percieved that he is just a fence sitter by voting that way. Which I personally think he is.

A fence sitter doesn't vote one way or another.

Originally posted by BackFire
Maybe, but seeing as it more or less gets counted as a 'no' it's not sitting on the fence, it's voting 'no' but saying that you aren't wholly against the premise. It's still making a decision, it's not a 'i don't know' as it's often insinuated.

True, but voting a soft no can be used for making excuses later on if your vote is questioned. Of course there are legit present votes as well. I just question Obama's usage of the vote. I am probably a little biased on this questioning though.

He's not made excuses though. The only people bringing up his present votes are liars who are misrepresenting what said votes actually mean.

Senate vote: H.J, Res 837- 100 million to rebuild bridges in VT, VA, TX & AK; 200 thousand dollars to fund a button museum in Bumfuk, AR; 30 million dollars to expand healthcare benefits to children of pregnant women with 1 foot; 40 million to fund clean needle replacement programs for inner city Anchorage youth; 3.7 million to study stem cell research in 12 states and 4 agencies; 5 hundred thousad to fund the expeansion of acne research for the topical solutions lobby; 14 thousand to buying boot hole puncher's for the troops that will serve in Iraq in 2012; 1 millions dollars to refurbish a bridge in lower Manhattan, NY; 37 million dollars to build a heathcare infrastructure for Charlotte, NC; 7 million dollars to subsidize the purchase of plastic arrows for Colorado Indian reservation's entertainment and tourism industry.

All those in favor?

Originally posted by Pezmerga
This post is idiotic. So now I am racist if I don't vote for Obama?

perhaps if being a racist is the only reason for not voting Obama you can see from my post, perhaps it is you that is the idiot. Less typing, more thinking.

if a person is republican and says they're voting republican no matter what, so be it. if a person says there is only one issue at all in the country that matters to me and that issue is _______, I agree with McCain's proposal on this issue so I'm voting for him.......so be it.

that's not what I'm seeing though.

I'm seeing a bunch of people endorsing McCain with no reason given....no stance on issues given...how these different stances add together to form an all around better choice for president. I'm seeing people who simply won't vote for a black man but are typing posts about no issues, no pros or cons.......just long posts about nothing that is unnecissary as they could easily just post, "he's a n-gger" and we'd all understand exactly where they're coming from and know why they made their decision without a bunch of unnecissary reading of paragraphs that just go round in circles without mentioning issues. It's 2008..........you have the right to be a racist if you wish. people should just stop sugar coating it.

If a person doesn't mention issues but says equivicly that they are voting for the white guy who statisticly will not live through his first term, much less a second to bank on long term security of the positions and stances taken on issues.......yeah, they're racist. "okay....he won't live through his term and I don't know that any of his proposals are better than the black guy's but he's white and I'm voting for him"........yeah....racist. no need for the sugar coating.

Posting this in this thread because it has to do with Palin's "Obama likes Terrorists more than America" insinuation: The Obama campaign's Robert Gibbs completely owning Sean Hannity about the Ayers attack.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/08/robert-gibbs-confronts-ha_n_132842.html