0
   

THE GENERAL ELECTION 2008

 
 
Foxfyre
 
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2008 03:06 pm
Okay, so it will not be seen as tromping on toes on a pro-Obama thread or a pro-McCain thread, let's have one where we can tromp on whatever toes for the next five months.

In the 2008 General Election who are you the most for? Or the least against? Or the most against?

No need to specifically focus on the presidential election as the makeup of Congress is likely to have a significant impact on what the elected candidate can expect to accomplish. And that could be a good thing or bad thing depending on how you see it.

From Today's Rasmussen Tracking Poll:
Quote:
Wednesday, June 04, 2008 Email to a FriendAdvertisement
The Primary and Caucus Season is now officially over and a potentially fascinating General Election campaign is finally underway.

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday, day one of the General Election, shows Barack Obama attracting 43% of the vote while John McCain earns 41%. When "leaners" are included, Obama retains a two-point edge, 47% to 45%. Leaners are survey respondents who initially do not favor either candidate but indicate their support on a follow-up question (see daily results).

Both candidates have a lot of work to do if they are to win a majority of the popular vote. Just 32% of voters say they are "certain" to vote for Obama and an identical number are "certain" to vote for McCain. That means 36% of the nation's voters are open to possibly changing their vote.

Quote:
Rasmussen Reports Balance of Power Calculator. On Wednesday, Democrats continue to lead in states with 200 Electoral Votes while the GOP has the advantage in states with 189. States with 111 Votes are "leaners," and states with 38 Votes are Toss-Ups.

When "leaners" are added, the Democrats lead 260 to 240 (see summary of recent state-by-state results).

Those numbers have remained stable for a long time while the political nation has focused on the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination. However, significant shifts are likely in the near future, partly due to an increased focus on the general election and partly due to adjustments currently being made by Rasmussen Reports.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 14,718 • Replies: 316
No top replies

 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2008 03:13 pm
I predict that McCain will seriously stroke out or be on big time coumadin therapy. Hes OLD and hes used up. Hell die soon anyway.
Id be more concerned about his running mate. What if its a "Bush"


AAAAAAAARARARARARARARARARAGAGRGARGARGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2008 04:27 pm
farmerman wrote:
I predict that McCain will seriously stroke out or be on big time coumadin therapy. Hes OLD and hes used up. Hell die soon anyway.
Id be more concerned about his running mate. What if its a "Bush"


AAAAAAAARARARARARARARARARAGAGRGARGARGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH


I'm guessing that McCain, if elected, will choose to be a one-termer. But again, I could be very wrong about that.

I don't think he'll choose a Bush. Some think it's far more likely that Obama would choose a Clinton.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2008 04:45 pm
you forgot to add none of the above
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2008 04:47 pm
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
you forgot to add none of the above


"other" doesn't cover that?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jun, 2008 09:55 pm
The first volley of the campaign is fired. What will the response be?

MCCAIN CHALLENGE TO OBAMA: TEN JOINT TOWNHALLS


June 4, 2008

The Honorable Barack Obama
Obama for America
P.O. Box 8102
Chicago, Illinois 60680

Dear Senator Obama:

In 1963, Senator Barry Goldwater and President John F. Kennedy agreed to make presidential campaign history by flying together from town to town and debating each other face-to-face on the same stage. In Goldwater's words, those debates "would have done the country a lot of good." Unfortunately, with President Kennedy's untimely death, Americans lost the rare opportunity of witnessing candidates for the highest office in the land discuss civilly and extensively the great issues at stake in the election. What a welcome change it would be were presidential candidates in our time to treat each other and the people they seek to lead with respect and courtesy as they discussed the great issues of the day, without the empty sound bites and media-filtered exchanges that dominate our elections. It is in the spirit of President Kennedy's and Senator Goldwater's agreement, in the spirit of the politics of change, and to do our country good, that I invite you to join me in participating in town hall meetings across the country to discuss the most important issues facing Americans. I also suggest we fly together to the first town hall meeting as a symbolically important act embracing the politics of civility.

I propose these town hall meetings be as free from the regimented trappings, rules and spectacle of formal debates as possible, and that we pledge to the American people we will not allow the idea to die on the negotiation table as our campaigns work out the details. I suggest we agree to participate in at least ten town halls once a week with the first on June 11 or 12 in New York City at Federal Hall until the week before the Democratic Convention begins at locations to be determined by our campaigns.Ê Federal Hall is particularly fitting as it was the place where George Washington took the oath of office as our first President and the birthplace of American government hosting the first Congress, Supreme Court and Executive Branch offices. These town halls should be attended by an audience of between two to four hundred selected by an independent polling agency, could be sixty to ninety minutes in length, have very limited moderation by an independent local moderator, take blind questions from the audience selected by the moderator and allow for equally proportional time for answers by each of us. All of these are suggestions that can be finalized by our campaigns. What is important is that we commit to participate in these history making meetings to join in the higher level of discourse that Americans clearly would prefer.

To show our good faith, we should both commit to the first town hall I have suggested. In the mean time, we can work out dates for future town hall meetings.

I look forward to your favorable reply and to the opportunity to work with you to give Americans a better opportunity to understand our differences, our agreements and the leadership we offer them.

Sincerely,

John McCain
POSTED ON THE DRUDGE REPORT
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 01:19 am
Mary Ruwart - when the candidates for Libertarian nominee were asked if they'd repeal all gun laws back to the 1920's she was first to answer, which she did with one unqualified word - 'yes'. What stones! Barr, you know, he's a compromise, card-carriers myself want to see a message sent this time, the finer issues are non-critical, so someone like him makes it easier for folk with less adequate bladder control to sign off as well.

Anyway, that said, there's always room for the likes of McCain. If I were picking out a team to de-tumor my brain he'd be welcome, I mean take all the platitudes you like, he's the one worth reading a book about - pure magnitude of existence - one can only guess the cosmic truths which have become apparent to him where he's been.

With either of the populist candidates freedom will be lost. It might be gained too, in a sense, commuted, but we're not playing 'let's make a deal', freedom ain't freedom when someone has to meter it out. To some of you kids it's just natural that the wild west is over, that it was OK, maybe to be celebrated for folk to make it or break it then but no good now, maybe if you're self-righteous enough you think the justification is gone, I could swear for some it's just to make sure no one else is getting off when you ain't, but it will be the hands of bureaucrats in instances to be carved in history that put it to bed. Obama's easily the one more at ease with changing folks acts for them, but that ain't the point. We could talk it through, but if it's going to be carrot-and-stick either way how do we interpolate which one will carrot-and-stick us in a more American manner? I'm astounded how easy it is for folk here to talk about it, positive freedoms, social equity, like it's just cool to step on other Americans toes to try and build heaven - I ain't that superstitious - it reminds me how a function can't double back on itself. My thing is who do non-Americans not want... You guessed it, practically every other nation, many of which we know have it in for us or something to gain from our weakness are for Obama. What I say is them foreigners are strainin' for a McCainin'!
0 Replies
 
alex240101
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 06:53 am
Throw us a rope.
http://www.uuforum.org/deficit.htm
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 08:51 am
hanno wrote:
Mary Ruwart - when the candidates for Libertarian nominee were asked if they'd repeal all gun laws back to the 1920's she was first to answer, which she did with one unqualified word - 'yes'. What stones! Barr, you know, he's a compromise, card-carriers myself want to see a message sent this time, the finer issues are non-critical, so someone like him makes it easier for folk with less adequate bladder control to sign off as well.

Anyway, that said, there's always room for the likes of McCain. If I were picking out a team to de-tumor my brain he'd be welcome, I mean take all the platitudes you like, he's the one worth reading a book about - pure magnitude of existence - one can only guess the cosmic truths which have become apparent to him where he's been.

With either of the populist candidates freedom will be lost. It might be gained too, in a sense, commuted, but we're not playing 'let's make a deal', freedom ain't freedom when someone has to meter it out. To some of you kids it's just natural that the wild west is over, that it was OK, maybe to be celebrated for folk to make it or break it then but no good now, maybe if you're self-righteous enough you think the justification is gone, I could swear for some it's just to make sure no one else is getting off when you ain't, but it will be the hands of bureaucrats in instances to be carved in history that put it to bed. Obama's easily the one more at ease with changing folks acts for them, but that ain't the point. We could talk it through, but if it's going to be carrot-and-stick either way how do we interpolate which one will carrot-and-stick us in a more American manner? I'm astounded how easy it is for folk here to talk about it, positive freedoms, social equity, like it's just cool to step on other Americans toes to try and build heaven - I ain't that superstitious - it reminds me how a function can't double back on itself. My thing is who do non-Americans not want... You guessed it, practically every other nation, many of which we know have it in for us or something to gain from our weakness are for Obama. What I say is them foreigners are strainin' for a McCainin'!


A lot of thought provoking stuff there Hanno. Are you saying you are for Barr? Or McCain?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 08:53 am
alex240101 wrote:


So Alex, do you think McCain with his pledge to accept no ear marks coupled with no new taxes is the best candidate to address the deficit? Or Obama who has pledged billions in new spending? (Neither claim any expertise on the economy by the way.)
0 Replies
 
hanno
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 01:35 pm
McCain's got my vote. I'd take Barr over McCain, but if it's in any way close I'll vote for McCain. If Ruwart were running I'd vote for her no questions asked. Whatever happens after this, even if it's McCain vs. Barack again I intend to vote principle (for me, 9/10 times Libertarian) or not show up.

That said, I don't see McCain as a compromise against my principles - I'd want the likes of him, this military/conservative/statesman aesthetic in addition to anyone that action-packed on the team no matter what. They cancel out liberals, which on the outside chance liberal is the way to go there must still be checks, and even in a Libertarian-controlled government we'd have to be able and not-unwilling to TCB. I mean foreigners hate him and there's more to him (I'd take a liquor store robber over a business/law type) than politics - so all else being equal between he and Barack it's a wash. I realize that's loose, back door logic, but it's foolish to reckon these things in terms of what the politico's sell themselves as or say they're going to do - we know that's mostly for show and it's all shades of grey and worst of all, except for what we do internationally (McCains point), it all comes out of what some other American has been doing on his/her own turf.

On the other side, Barack - I'd almost like to see it go as far as it would - like have the nation come off going all the way right with Bush, take the other side of the coin with Barack, then hopefully get a new idea. If it were to play out that way it would be the fastest conceivable sequence of events to lead to a Libertarian administration. Maybe I just don't got the guts to want to risk it not working out that way, but look at how we're stuck with Social Security whether we want it or not - Barack with both houses would de-liberate the nation in such a manner as to be irreparable in my lifetime. I think McCain getting in now will be a benefit to the LNC presidency whenever it happens.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 01:52 pm
hanno wrote:
McCain's got my vote. I'd take Barr over McCain, but if it's in any way close I'll vote for McCain. If Ruwart were running I'd vote for her no questions asked. Whatever happens after this, even if it's McCain vs. Barack again I intend to vote principle (for me, 9/10 times Libertarian) or not show up.

That said, I don't see McCain as a compromise against my principles - I'd want the likes of him, this military/conservative/statesman aesthetic in addition to anyone that action-packed on the team no matter what. They cancel out liberals, which on the outside chance liberal is the way to go there must still be checks, and even in a Libertarian-controlled government we'd have to be able and not-unwilling to TCB. I mean foreigners hate him and there's more to him (I'd take a liquor store robber over a business/law type) than politics - so all else being equal between he and Barack it's a wash. I realize that's loose, back door logic, but it's foolish to reckon these things in terms of what the politico's sell themselves as or say they're going to do - we know that's mostly for show and it's all shades of grey and worst of all, except for what we do internationally (McCains point), it all comes out of what some other American has been doing on his/her own turf.

On the other side, Barack - I'd almost like to see it go as far as it would - like have the nation come off going all the way right with Bush, take the other side of the coin with Barack, then hopefully get a new idea. If it were to play out that way it would be the fastest conceivable sequence of events to lead to a Libertarian administration. Maybe I just don't got the guts to want to risk it not working out that way, but look at how we're stuck with Social Security whether we want it or not - Barack with both houses would de-liberate the nation in such a manner as to be irreparable in my lifetime. I think McCain getting in now will be a benefit to the LNC presidency whenever it happens.


Okay, my libertarian (little "L") soul can't really quarrel with that all that much. The most important differences between McCain and Obama for me is that McCain appreciates the importance and value of victory with honor as opposed to Obama's get the troops out at any price mindset; McCain has promised to oppose earmarks--and he has a very good track record on that--and has pledged no new taxes as opposed to Obama's pledge to restore at least some previous tax cuts and his concept of gutting defense and initiating billions in new social spending.

McCain further pledges to appoint strict constructionists to the Courts, something that Obama almost certainly won't do.

I think neither will make any serious effort to arrive at a satisfactory solution for the illegal immigration problem so that is a wash.

I have some strong philosophical differences on various issues with both, but I think McCain will do less harm as President of the USA.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 03:16 pm
http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/cb0605awj.jpg
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 03:22 pm
You're dead on there, Fox

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 06:28 pm
One from one of my favorite economists and historians:


Obama and McCain
By Thomas Sowell
June 5, 2008
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols2/tsowell.JPGLINK
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 06:37 pm
Tommy got to here

Quote:

Just as the Nazis did not find it enough to simply kill people in their concentration camps, but had to humiliate and dehumanize them first, so we can expect terrorists with nuclear weapons to both humiliate us and force us to humiliate ourselves, before they finally start killing us.


Before he completely lost seriousness.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 06:42 pm
How so? This guy has forgotten more history than you or I will ever know. I minored in History in College and I am in awe of what he knows.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 06:51 pm
And? That doesn't make him either right, or serious.

I thought that the whole phrase 'ivory-tower liberal' that you Republicans like to utter was built around that exact premise: that higher education does not make you an ounce more right or wrong on issues. Right?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 06:55 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
How so? This guy has forgotten more history than you or I will ever know. I minored in History in College and I am in awe of what he knows.
really, just what college was that and did you complete a degree with a minor in history and was your major that you got that degree in Journalism? I suppose it's all just a matter of credibility but some of us would like to know (feel free to avoid answering any of my questions that you feel uncomfortable with)
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Jun, 2008 07:08 pm
Speaking of ethics, republicans and my home state Heather Wilson (on the list for investigation by the house ethics committee) lost her primary bid for the US Senate to Steve Pierce a local wingnut who has been a consistent and strong advocate of drilling in Otero Mesa, New Mexico despite environmentalists and the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) assertion that only a minuscule amount of oil and natural gas lie beneath the grasslands. Rep. Pearce, however, contends that drilling in the area would keep natural gas prices level and create jobs thereby stimulating the state's economy. Initially, the BLM opposed opening the area arguing that drilling would both directly and indirectly destruct the habitat for wildlife. In 2000, however, BLM reversed its decision and proposed a plan that would open nearly 1.4 million acres to drilling. The BLM turnaround coincided with the largest lease holder in the Otero Mesa, Yates Petroleum, donating over $230,000 to the GOP over the last three election cycles.

Yates Petroleum also has been the single largest donor to Rep. Pearce's campaign committees since 2002 with $32,490 in donations. Individually, members of the Yates family have contributed $78,379.99 to Rep. Pearce since he first ran for office in 2002.

If Rep. Pearce advocated opening up Otero Mesa to drilling in exchange for campaign contributions, he may have violated the bribery statute or accepted illegal gratuities.
But then ethics is not a strong point of republicans in general. in fact, I would say they reek just slight more so than democrats.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » THE GENERAL ELECTION 2008
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.35 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 01:52:39