Democrats can expect to get trounced, it's that simple

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I am one of those independents, and I will make my choice based on the debates. I have to be honest, it doesn't look good for McCain, but you are right, time will tell.

Let me ask you then Shaky, if McCain does well and presents himself as knowledgeable on the issues, experienced with the necessary skills, and competent, though less of a showstopping speaker like Obama, would you want to vote for him?

Originally posted by Robtard
If Sithsaber is correct, McCain should just come out and say "No abortions and no gays, **** those people!", that will seal the deal with the Conservatives.

He can then spend the rest of the debate trying to pull the moderates/indies with talks of the economy, environment, foreign affairs, Iraq war etc.

I know he does get portrayed as a "maverick" and "independent" but on those social issues his voting record has been pretty consistent. (if conservatives realize this, he'll have no trouble there)

His appeal to moderates is what will be the hardest for him.

His positions on global warming and immigration are a huge plus for him with those voters, his dogged defense of the war is not. (though he gets some points for being right about "the surge"😉

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Let me ask you then Shaky, if McCain does well and presents himself as knowledgeable on the issues, experienced with the necessary skills, and competent, though less of a showstopping speaker like Obama, would you want to vote for him?...

Yes, I would. The fact that when he was a prisoner of war he refused to be given special treatment is a plus for him that is great, in my opinion, then presentation. However, there are a lot more things at stake. The direction the country will take in the future is one example.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Yes, I would. The fact that when he was a prisoner of war he refused to be given special treatment is a plus for him that is great, in my opinion, then presentation. However, there are a lot more things at stake. The direction the country will take in the future is one example.

A good middle of the road.

Like John McCain. 😄

YouTube video

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Good response. 👆 America needs more voters like you, not knee-jerk liberals or neo-con fascists.

A good middle of the road.

Like John McCain. 😄

To be honest, I'm leery of meeting with your approval. 😉

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Good response. 👆 America needs more voters like you, not knee-jerk liberals or neo-con fascists.

so i guess you're staying home on election day?

I missed the problem there.

McCain got the support of a pastor who prefers him to Obama. He's happy for that support.

Moreover, what did pastor Hagee say that was wrong? That is a certain verse in the Bible, and it could very well be interpereted that way.

And as for the end, he's not the first to compare modern American liberalism with a slide into Soddom and Gammorah.

At least he's biblical, can we say the same for Pastor Jeremiah "america deserved 9/11 and AIDS is government posion for blacks" Wright?

Next topic please.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Let me ask you then Shaky, if McCain does well and presents himself as knowledgeable on the issues, experienced with the necessary skills, and competent, though less of a showstopping speaker like Obama, would you want to vote for him? He doesn't even have to say that. His record on the abortion issue is conservative (he supports it only in rape or incest cases or to save the life of the mother) and while he wouldn't support a federal ban on gay marriage (preferring states to choose), he did in his own state keep it between man and woman, and supports civil unions. Also, he'll appoint conservative judges.

I know he does get portrayed as a "maverick" and "independent" but on those social issues his voting record has been pretty consistent. (if conservatives realize this, he'll have no trouble there)

His appeal to moderates is what will be the hardest for him.

His positions on global warming and immigration are a huge plus for him with those voters, his dogged defense of the war is not. (though he gets some points for being right about "the surge"😉

Well then, that pretty much makes him an idiot, no? I can understand the 'life of the mother' concept, as self-preservation is a strong desire. But a "baby" suddenly doesn't have the right to life if the father is a rapist or is a father-uncle? Talk about making one accountable for the sins of the father. Moronic.

The far-Right wing has a problem with him, but not on issues like abortion or equal rights based on sexuality.

If you think he'll have a hard time appealing to moderates (which he will), what makes you think he can pull them instead of Obama, as you said to DK above, just because of two issues?

BTW, has the surge really worked? Is there any indication that America can leave Iraq and Iraq will sustain itself as a democracy?

i guess declaring that god sent hitler to strip the jews of their faith and send them back to isreal is ok. and no, he doesnt just happen to support mccain, but rather mccain actively worked at winning his endorsement.

Originally posted by Robtard
... BTW, has the surge really worked? Is there any indication that America can leave Iraq and Iraq will sustain itself as a democracy?

Has the US left Germany after WWII yet?

Originally posted by Schecter
i guess declaring that god sent hitler to strip the jews of their faith and send them back to isreal is ok. and no, he doesnt just happen to support mccain, but rather mccain actively worked at winning his endorsement.

Hmm.. didn't know that McCain actively sought the endorsement.

But if you want to get into religious debates, many schools of thought are that "God is in control" and that everything is ordained of him.

So it could be argued that, in a way, God "sent" hitler to strip jews of their faith and sent them back to Israel. Those 2 things happened, and if you believe God is in control, then he meant them to happen. And plus, he's found some scriptures that support that thinking.

I personally don't agree with that line of thinking ("Every good and perfect gift comes from the father, it is the enemy who comes to steal, kill and destroy"😉 but he's not some whacked out preacher for saying so.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Has the US left Germany after WWII yet?

You know, every time I here that come up or the 'has the US left Japan', I want to strick needles into squirrels. Such a necon cop-out.

1) The US soundly defeated Germany and Japan, then set up bases as a presense. There was little or no opposition from the Germans or the Japanese afterwards.

2) America could have left either (Germany on the grounds that Russia didn't do something) country shortly after and there would have been peace and stability.

Edit: I forgot to add, when the war was sold to the American public, it was on the grounds that America would remove Saddam, help set up a democracy and then leave Iraq, all within 6-12 months and within the budget of $600k-800k.

yeah, or he could just be a piece of garbage with millions of willing neoconservative apologist turd-polishers like yourself willing to explain away.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Has the US left Germany after WWII yet?

not sure of your point there. are you using it as justification for military presence on foreign sovereign soil or just stating 'what is' to point out a technicallity?

Originally posted by Robtard
You know, every time I here that come up or the 'has the US left Japan', I want to strick needles into squirrels. Such a necon cop-out.

1) The US soundly defeated Germany and Japan, then set up bases as a presense. There was little or no opposition from the Germans or the Japanese afterwards.

2) Also, America could have left either (Germany on the grounds that Russia didn't do something) country shortly after and there would have been peace and stability.

That wasn't my point. My point is; I do not believe Obama when he says he will bring the troop home. I'm cynical on this topic.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That wasn't my point. My point is; I do not believe Obama when he says he will bring the troop home.

considering that germany and japan signed their surrenders, i think you're comparing apples and oranges.

are there any more japanese troops in china?

Originally posted by Schecter
yeah, or he could just be a piece of garbage with millions of willing neoconservative apologist turd-polishers like yourself willing to explain away.

Now hold on, Paul. I want to educate you here, if I can be so bold.

What he's saying (at least from a biblical standpoint) isn't off. It's one interpretation (one that I don't personally share), but it's not like he pulled it from his rear.

You don't have to like it or agree, but as a minister he's using the scriptures and a certain set of theological convictions (God is in control, ordaines everything) to make that assertation.

I know it might not matter to you, but as far as what he's preaching from the pulpit, he's in the parameters of where he should be.

He's not in fact spreading nonsense that America deserved 9/11 or devised a plot to give African Americans AIDS. (has nothing to do with scripture, see the difference?)

What the f*ck does religious crap have to do with an political election?

Oh, yeah...

USA! USA! USA!

Actually, Wright's comment about America's chickens coming home to roost was based in biblical ideas. This is made very very clear if you listen to the context of the sermon that was conveniently left out while the story was 'covered' by the news networks. His point was merely that violence begets violence and he referenced some biblical stories during that sermon.

I love how the discussion has turned from:

"Obama will totally beat McCain"

to

Well, some people and polls say different

to

"conservatives hate gays and l0lZpast0rz11"

because

the point is made that Obama sure as heck doesn't have the presidency all tied up in bow and McCain is a strong contender, just as he is.