United States Presidential Election 2008 - Official Discussion Thread

Started by Devil King143 pages

Originally posted by sithsaber408
From your link:

-“If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole" -John McCain

They call his claim "barely true", but it's right there: He DID say 2 years ago that it's a serious problem that has to be worked on. (that's all he's claiming, not that he made moves to stop it. Just that he brought it up)

He didn't do much about it, and is playing it up, but he made steps to bring this problem to light.

And he put it on the congressional record.

Obama meanwhile, is the 2nd highest recipient of funds from Fannie/Freddie in a survey taken over a 20 year period, and he's only been there 4 years.

That's a fact.

And he's got former CEO's from those companies as advisors.

McCain is more often then not right: Right about Fannie/Freddie, right about the surge, right about the response to Russia (both of which are positions that Obama has now taken), right on not raising taxes on businesses or people (I don't care how much they make, it's NOT patriotic Joe!), and he's been right for a long time.

Why wouldn't you vote for the person who seems to show the right judgement on all the major issues?

For fun, here's a youtube video since everybody likes to post them now:

YouTube video

Hows that change on abortion from two years ago working out for you?

You know, at least Frau Palin has the hockey puck-sized balls not to differentiate between cases of accidental (re: her daughter) pregnancy and cases of rape or incest. I mean, if your wife got raped by her uncle and became preggers, then the "will of god" would be fulfilled if she had to carry the pregancy to term. After all, the divine hand of god involves himself so much in the affairs of each and every human being that he would have to want that baby to be born, right? I'm sure you're willing to raise the child of your wife's father's brother. Not one ounce of resentment on your part will be involved, I'm sure.

Even if your wife thinks she agrees with the positions of Mrs. Palin, finding herself in that situation would change her tune. So would yours, I might add.

You likely think this post is an attempt to distract your point. But it really isn't. It's just an attempt to illustrate how you think as a republican you have the obligation to set the bar when it comes to an actual discussion.

How about your friend, Mr. O'Rielly, saying that the parents of Jamie Lyn Spears were pinheads and responsible for her being a teenage pregancy case and then turning around and congratulating the Palins for happily accepting it? Where are your high-alter MORALS? now? Where is that blanket disdain for the outer fringes of bible-inspired morals you have spent the last few years professing? They seem to have vanished in the face of an irresponsible and wreckless choice made by the canidate you now think is god's answer too the blatant ****-ups your own goddamn party has made for the last 8 years. If he's such a maverick, then why doesn't he have the balls to run as an independant?

And you, personally, have no right to tout him as a maverick or an answer to a ****ing thing, when you've spent the last few years claiming Bush was doing a wonderful job as president and minister-in-chief, only to now puke up the idea that John McCain is a change from the crap you've been openly supporting for the last several years. Do you have even one ounce of integrity? You're supporting a candidate that has apparetly spent the last 26 years being the opposition of the practices and policies you've spent the last 4 years supporting?

I think your political understanding is a ricockulous joke and you're making an ass of yourself. You just aren't bright enough to realize it.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Since we're avoiding topics and posting other things, everybody should have a read of this:
It was an on-topic post, don't accuse me of avoiding things.

Originally posted by KidRock
I wonder if the Bradley effect will come into play this election.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/bad-math-and-bradley-effect.html

I wonder if the "reverse" Bradley effect will come into play this election?

Originally posted by Strangelove
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/bad-math-and-bradley-effect.html
A Pew study actually found some evidence for a Bradley and Reverse Bradley effect in the Primaries. Although I'm not sure how prevalent an effect there will be if there will be one at all in the general US election.
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/755/tracking-the-race-factor

I'm not sure if New Hampshire was a Hillary Clinton specific effect, or whether the Obama campaign should be concerned with their slim lead in current state polls. Likewise the McCain campaign with their slim lead in Virginia. However one is worth 4 EVs while the other is worth 13 EVs... so I would be more worried on the McCain side I think. If McCain doesn't win Virginia I doubt he can win the election.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I'm not sure if New Hampshire was a Hillary Clinton specific effect, or whether the Obama campaign should be concerned with their slim lead in current state polls.

Obama should absolutely be concerned. Mrs. Clinton wasnt just a fluke; even in a state as liberal as NH.

Originally posted by Devil King
Obama should absolutely be concerned. Mrs. Clinton wasnt just a fluke; even in a state as liberal as NH.
The interesting thing is that if Obama only manages to turn Iowa (which is all but certain) New Mexico and Colorado (which are the next most probable iirc) while McCain manages to turn NH red, you end up with a 269-269 map; assuming states that split their votes end up voting uniformly...

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The interesting thing is that if Obama only manages to turn Iowa (which is all but certain) New Mexico and Colorado (which are the next most probable iirc) while McCain manages to turn NH red, you end up with a 269-269 map; assuming states that split their votes end up voting uniformly...

Colorado I would call a toss up

New Mexico is what I would call a safe assumption.

New Hampshire, I think can be asfely assigned to the blue map.

Colorado currently is projected at Obama +3.6, according to 538. The exact same margin as their current projection for New Hampshire.

Nevada is also very close.

And RCP now has Indiana as a tossup. This election really couldn't be any closer.

Anyways, some interesting news about the upcoming debates. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26819782/

Seems both camps have agreed to a more free style, less structured debate for all three presidential debates.

However, apparently the McCain camp didn't want a similar style for the VP debate and demanded a more structured style for it.

For those who care, the first debate is this friday.

I go to school at Indiana University, and there's a Deputy National Political Director here who was basically sent to Bloomington by David Plouffe himself: he said the road to victory in Indiana goes straight through Monroe County.

Originally posted by BackFire
However, apparently the McCain camp didn't want a similar style for the VP debate and demanded a more structured style for it.
By all means, demand a form that leaves less room for improvisation and a chance to express experienced opinions.

Edit: double post

Originally posted by Strangelove
New projections from 538.com:

Electoral College: Obama 311.5-226.5

Win Percentage: Obama 74.4%-25.6%

Popular Vote: Obama 50.3%-47.9%

I'm betting 51 - 46 for OB - MP.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Good on you, your candidate is doing well this week. Debates should be interesting.

Since we're avoiding topics and posting other things, everybody should have a read of this:

The Undefended City
No despair.

By Bill Whittle

When I first got to college, back in the last few weeks of the Seventies, I finally got a chance to see an ordinary game of Dungeons and Dragons. My immediate inclination was to play as a Paladin: the pinnacle of Lawful Good, a character required to dash in and fight overwhelmingly powerful evil forces anywhere and at whatever odds. These contests were short, depressing and hilarious, but all D&D really came down to in the end was slaying small monsters, taking their gold, buying slightly better gear and then slaying slightly larger monsters. Why not just save some time and become a Vorpal Sword distributor? Then you get the weapons and the gold, and people bring them both to you. And so a larval conservative was born. And I never played again.

That was the attitude I took into The Lord of the Rings when the first of the trilogy appeared in 2001, just a few months after the Two Towers actually did fall and the idea of good and evil suddenly became — to me and no doubt to you too — a great deal less ironic and a great deal more real.

And there, in the darkness, staring up at that screen, I marveled at this monumental font of deep and eternal ideas: the aversion to facing danger, even when it is right in front of us; the value of old and true allies; the corrosive force of addiction; responsibility forsaken, then reclaimed… and through it all the fear that we may be lesser sons of greater fathers, and that we may no longer have the courage or the will to defend the City entrusted to our care.

This, and more, what was what John Ronald Reuel Tolkien was trying to teach me, down that dark river of the future — and he ought to know. The Lord of the Rings was written between 1937 through 1949… years of dark waters, indeed.

A few years before Tolkien put pen to paper, an event took place that a man of his education would have undoubtedly been aware. On February 9th, 1933, the ruling elite of the world’s great Civilization held a debate in the Oxford Union. With thunderclouds growing dark across the English Channel, at a time when resolute action could still have averted the worst catastrophe the world has ever known, these elites resolved that “This House will in no circumstances fight for its King and Country.”

The Resolution passed by a vote of 275 to 153. Needless to say, this vote did not avert the fight. It guaranteed it.

How much of the weight of that, I wonder, sat along side him as he penned page after page about the decline of the Men of the West. For taken in its entirety, The Lord of the Rings is about the collective regeneration of the will and courage of a previous age, and ends with the hope that the greatest days of the City lie yet ahead.

I live a few miles from Santa Monica High School, in California. There, young men and women are taught that America is “a terrorist nation,” “one of the worst regimes in history,” that it’s twice-elected leader is “the son of the devil,” and dictator of this “fascist” country. Further, “patriotism” is taught by dragging an American flag across the classroom floor, because the nation’s truest patriots, as we should know by now, are those who are most able to despise it.

This is only high school, remember: in college things get much, much worse.

Two generations, now, are being raised on this poison, and the reason for that is this: the enemies of this city cannot come out and simply say, “Do not defend the city.” Even the smartest among us can see that is simple treason. But they can say, “The City is not worth defending.” So they say that, and they say that all the time and in as many different ways as they are able.

If you step far enough back to look at the whole of human history, you will begin to see a very plain rhythm: a heartbeat of civilization. Steep climbs out of disease and ignorance into the light of medicine and learning — and then a sudden collapse back into darkness. And it is in that darkness that most humans have lived their lives: poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

The pattern is always the same: at the height of a civilization’s powers something catastrophic seems to occur — a loss of will, a failure of nerve, and above all an unwillingness to identify with the values and customs that have produced such wonders.

The Russians say a fish rots from the head down. They ought to know. It may not be factually true that Nero fiddled while Rome burned, the saying has passed into common usage because the image as the ring of truth to it: time and time again, the good and decent common people have manned the walls of the city, and have been ready to give their lives in its defense, only to discover too late that some silk-robed son of a ***** has snuck out of the palace at midnight and thrown open the gates to the barbarians outside.

And how is this done, this “throwing open of the gates?” How are defenders taken off the walls?

Well, most of what I learned about Vietnam I learned from men like Oliver Stone. This self-loathing narcissist has repeatedly tried to inculcate in me a sense of despair and outrage at my own government, my own culture, my own people and ultimately myself. He tried to convince me — and he is a skillfull man — that my own government murdered my own President for political gain. I am told daily in those darkened temples that rogue CIA elements run a puppet government, that the real threat to the nation comes from the generals that defend it, or from the businessmen that provide the prosperity we take for granted.

I sit with others in darkened rooms, watching films like Redacted, Stop-Loss, and In the Valley of Elah, and see our brave young soldiers depicted as murderers, rapists, broken psychotics or ignorant dupes –visions foisted upon me by bitter and isolated millionaires such as Brian de Palma and Paul Haggis and all the rest.

I’ve been told this story in some form or another, every day of every week of the past 30 years of my life. It wasn’t always so.

But it is certainly so today. And standing against all this hypnotic power — the power of the mythmakers in Hollywood, the power of the information peddlers in the media, the corrosive power of America-hating professors on every campus in America… against all that we find an old warrior — a paladin if ever there was one — an old, beat-up warhorse standing up in defense of his city one last time. And beside him: a wonder. A common person… just a regular mom who goes to work, does a difficult job with intelligence and energy and grace and every-day competence and then puts it away to go home and have dinner with the family.

Against all of that stand these two.

No wonder they must be destroyed. Because — Sarah Palin especially — presents a mortal threat to these people who have determined over cocktails who the next President should be and who now clearly mean to grind into metal shards the transaxle of their credibility in order to get the result they must have. Truly, they are before our eyes destroying the machine they have built in order to get their victory. What the hell is so threatening to be worth that?

Only this: the living proof that they are not needed. Not needed to govern, not needed to influence and guide, not needed to lecture us on our intellectual and moral failings which are visible only from the heights of Manhattan skyscrapers or the palaces up on Mulholland Drive. Not needed. We can do it — and do it better — without all of them.

When all is said and done, Civilizations do not fall because of the barbarians at the gates. Nor does a great city fall from the death wish of bored and morally bankrupt stewards presumably sworn to its defense. Civilizations fall only because each citizen of the city comes to accept that nothing can be done to rally and rebuild broken walls; that ground lost may never be recovered; and that greatness lived in our grandparents but not our grandchildren. Yes, our betters tell us these things daily. But that doesn’t mean we have to believe it.

Ask the common people of all politics and persuasions aboard Flight 93 whether greatness and courage has deserted America. Through this magical crystal ball — the one we are using right now — we common people can speak to one another. And by reminding ourselves and those around us of who we are, where we came from, what we have achieved together and of the marvels we have yet to achieve, we may laugh in the face of despair and mock those people that think a man with an MBA from Harvard knows more about running a gas station than the man that actually runs the gas station.

It is the small-town virtues of self-reliance, hard work, personal responsibility, and common-sense ingenuity — and not those of the preening cosmopolitans that gape at them in mixed contempt and bafflement — that have made us the inheritors of the most magnificent, noble, decent and free society ever to appear on this earth. This Western Civilization… this American City… has earned the right to greet each sunrise with a blast of silver trumpets that can bring down mountains.

And what, really, is a Legion of Narcissists and a Confederacy of Despair against that?

— Bill Whittle lives and works in Los Angeles.

Wow, what a shit article. Nothing but baseless propaganda coated in not particularly pretty words. Horrible self absorbed writer, that ****.

McCain has switched his previous 9/15/08 stance of "we have the fundamentals of good economy", to "oh shit, the economy is in trouble." Hey, at least it's a start.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Wow, what a shit article. Nothing but baseless propaganda coated in not particularly pretty words. Horrible self absorbed writer, that ****.

And the guy owes Rudy 47 dollars and 32 cents for his un-cited use of 9/11 propoganda.

Originally posted by Robtard
McCain has switched his previous 9/15/08 stance of "we have the fundamentals of good economy", to "oh shit, the economy is in trouble." Hey, at least it's a start.

Is Obamas stance still, "I..uh..now..uh..ya see now here is..uh..the thing with uh, uh.."

Originally posted by KidRock
Is Obamas stance still, "I..uh..now..uh..ya see now here is..uh..the thing with uh, uh.."

Not sure if it is or if it ever was that, considering he plans to raise taxes, increase minimum wage, perform a jihad and whatever over silly half-truth or flat out nonsense you've claimed he'd do in order to fix/destroy the economy.

Originally posted by KidRock
Is Obamas stance still, "I..uh..now..uh..ya see now here is..uh..the thing with uh, uh.."

He doesn't blink very much though, does he? Maybe he's not accessing the bullshit part of his brain when he speaks.

RealClearPolitics.com now has Michigan leaning Obama.

And good lord, Virginia is all over the place. One poll has Obama up by 6, another has McCain up by 2, and another has Obama up by 3.