2
   

Fear of a Black President

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:02 am
I am serious. Why don't you outline the ways in which McCain is running a better campaign, and show how that has him ahead?

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:03 am
mysteryman wrote:
• 5.6 percent of the 923 general officers or admirals were black.


mysteryman wrote:
Quote:


Since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan began, the percentage of blacks coming into the Army has plunged from 22 percent to 13 percent. Also, the percentage of blacks in the military overall has dipped in the past 10 years, from more than 20 percent to 17 percent today.


There are many factors involved, yet you immediately see racism.
That tells me that your mind is made up and you dont want to be confused by the truth.
You see racism where there is none.
Confused Which part of your own numbers are throwing you MM? Based solely on what you just provided; A white man is 3 times more likely to make General. Is this pure coincidence? Lash? You could argue a 'grandfather' situation I suppose, but that would be ill advised since your info also provides that 3 decades ago blacks made up twice as large of percent of the entire force.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:19 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
I am serious. Why don't you outline the ways...


You stated Obama running a better campaign then McCain.
When asked how so, the only outline you offered is "In every respect."

You failed to offer any examples.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:21 am
OCCOM BILL wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
• 5.6 percent of the 923 general officers or admirals were black.


mysteryman wrote:
Quote:


Since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan began, the percentage of blacks coming into the Army has plunged from 22 percent to 13 percent. Also, the percentage of blacks in the military overall has dipped in the past 10 years, from more than 20 percent to 17 percent today.


There are many factors involved, yet you immediately see racism.
That tells me that your mind is made up and you dont want to be confused by the truth.
You see racism where there is none.
Confused Which part of your own numbers are throwing you MM? Based solely on what you just provided; A white man is 3 times more likely to make General. Is this pure coincidence? Lash? You could argue a 'grandfather' situation I suppose, but that would be ill advised since your info also provides that 3 decades ago blacks made up twice as large of percent of the entire force.


Did you ignore this part of what I posted...

Quote:
Most often mentioned is that black recruits are showing less interest in pursuing combat jobs, which are more likely to propel them through the officer ranks.


You must have, because you sure didnt factor that in.
Besides, there are many officer ranks below general, and we dont know how many blacks are in that grouping.

Also,since it seems the black lawmakers are not sending black kids to the academies, that also makes it hard for young blacks to become officers.
It doesnt make it impossible, but it does make it that much tougher.

I still say you are seeing racism where there is none.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:21 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
H2O_MAN wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:


I remind you that he is running a better campaign then McCain


Really, how so?


In every respect. And there is little disagreement about this amongst those who have been paying attention.

Cycloptichorn


Oh, I am probably going to regret this, but Cyc is absolutely right.

Obama has been running one of the smoothest campaigns I can remember and McCain can't seem to get his campaign to just STFU. McCain has Obama nailed on politics but has so far failed miserably to just stick to his strengths. Instead, people associated with his campaign just keep make mistake after mistake and for every step McCain makes forward, someone knocks him back 2. It's almost painful to watch as he is one of my favorite politicians ever.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:23 am
I suppose that's it's possible that those same 59 million dumbies could vote McCain. The precedent is there. How could they have been so stupid?
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:26 am
What is so smooth about Obama's campaign?

Is it his ability to avoid spontaneous, unscripted questions?
Is it his ability to control who is in the audience?
Is it his ability to control media access to his campaign?

Obama's campaign is not about Hope & Change, it's all about Control & Avoidance.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:27 am
I bet Obama reinstitutes the draft.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:39 am
One of the reasons he might win in a landslide is his move from the left, which he campaigned against Clinton as, too the center which he became after he had the nomination locked up. And no Snood I am not a raciast unless hating Chicago politicians is being racist.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:42 am
Edit
One of the reasons he might NOT win ect.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 09:59 am
Obama's handle on the press allows him to authorize articles about his
campaign ... nobody except the Clinton's have ever had this privilege.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:12 am
How someone runs a campaign is too subjective.

What hard criteria would you say should position a candidate for a landslide?

A lot of experience over inexperience? (Even that can really be counted--what if the experience backfires as making the candidate too entrenched in politics as usual?)

What are the criteria?

(Bill, I saw my name in a post you directed to MM about the percentages of blacks with high military rank. I had no opinion about that issue--I don't have the information to formulate an opinion.)
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:23 am
Lash wrote:
How someone runs a campaign is too subjective.

What hard criteria would you say should position a candidate for a landslide?

A lot of experience over inexperience? (Even that can really be counted--what if the experience backfires as making the candidate too entrenched in politics as usual?)

What are the criteria?

(Bill, I saw my name in a post you directed to MM about the percentages of blacks with high military rank. I had no opinion about that issue--I don't have the information to formulate an opinion.)


Neither candidate has more experience running as their party's nominee for Prez; both are new to the game.

I would say that the criteria is: who has better message control? Who is spending their money wisely? Who has seen results from their efforts?

It's hard to not see Obama as winning all three of those issues. McCain's campaign has no central narrative; he's been all over the place, trying to find a way to get traction against Obama. The RNC and McCain spent over 15 million on TV ads in July alone and the numbers didn't budge a bit...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:30 am
Here is something. I'd love to read comments by people who aren't in a political camp re: this info:

The Presidential election model relies upon four political factors12 out of 14 times in our sample, and predicted the popular vote better than the original model developed by Ray Fair....

According to this model, an expected 47% increase in the price of oil (WTI) in the three quarters leading up to the election would reduce Senator McCain's vote tally by 2.9 percentage points, while weak real disposable personal income growth over the same period would reduce it by 3.3 percentage points.


Source

This source predicts an Obama landslide.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:31 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
It's hard to not see Obama as winning all three of those issues. McCain's campaign has no central narrative; he's been all over the place, trying to find a way to get traction against Obama. The RNC and McCain spent over 15 million on TV ads in July alone and the numbers didn't budge a bit...

Cycloptichorn


The interesting fact you offer at the end of this paragraph could also be used - with equal significance - to demonstrate the ineffectiveness of the even greater expenditures of the Obama campaign during the same period.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:34 am
Cycloptichorn wrote:
The RNC and McCain spent over 15 million on TV ads in July alone and the numbers didn't budge a bit...



Considering the big 3 were in bed with Obama and totally ignoring McCain
in hopes that his numbers would drop out of sight, the RNC made a wise
investment. McCain's numbers didn't drop, they are actually going up.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:35 am
I just wonder how they assimilate and calculate these things into figures....and do they consider the war aspect? That always tips in the favor of the GOP... I wish I could find some laywoman's explanation.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:38 am
georgeob1 wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
It's hard to not see Obama as winning all three of those issues. McCain's campaign has no central narrative; he's been all over the place, trying to find a way to get traction against Obama. The RNC and McCain spent over 15 million on TV ads in July alone and the numbers didn't budge a bit...

Cycloptichorn


The interesting fact you offer at the end of this paragraph could also be used - with equal significance - to demonstrate the ineffectiveness of the even greater expenditures of the Obama campaign during the same period.


Maybe, if there WERE greater expenditures during that period. But, there were not. Obama did almost no television or radio advertising during June.

http://www.nysun.com/national/obama-scrimps-on-spending-to-build-up-warchest/82248/

Besides, when you are ahead in the national polls and far ahead in state/electoral vote polling, you don't want or need the situation to change in the way you do when you are behind...

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 10:41 am
Lash wrote:
I just wonder how they assimilate and calculate these things into figures....and do they consider the war aspect?


Good point.

It seems the left has forgotten all about the GWOT and the attacks on this country and other places by Islamic terrorists.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jul, 2008 11:21 am
H2O_MAN wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
The RNC and McCain spent over 15 million on TV ads in July alone and the numbers didn't budge a bit...



Considering the big 3 were in bed with Obama and totally ignoring McCain
in hopes that his numbers would drop out of sight, the RNC made a wise
investment. McCain's numbers didn't drop, they are actually going up.


Are you saying there's a conspiracy to keep McCain down?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 10/06/2024 at 05:26:34