The 2008 US Presidential Election Thread

[Enigma869]

Watching this interview with Gibson, it becomes VERY clear why the McCain camp is keeping this woman away from interviews. She simply doesn't come across well, AT ALL. I'm not sure if Gibson or ABC are die-hard democrats, but he is challenging her on EVERYTHING. She's not really directly answering any questions. Gibson asks a question, and she gives an answer that has nothing to do with the question that was asked. I especially liked when ABC showed Puppet Palin holding up the T-Shirt for the Bridge To Nowhere that she is now claiming she was against. Typical full of shit politician! Apparently, even way the fuck up in Alaska these politicians learn the number one rule of politics...lie your ass off, no matter how moronic you end up looking when the truth is revealed. I can only hope that one of these days, our great nation finds respectable politicians. This country has NEVER needed "change" more, and I don't believe any of the four of these people belong anywhere near The White House!


John from Boston

[RossValoryRocks]

Watching this interview with Gibson, it becomes VERY clear why the McCain camp is keeping this woman away from interviews. She simply doesn't come across well, AT ALL. I'm not sure if Gibson or ABC are die-hard democrats, but he is challenging her on EVERYTHING. She's not really directly answering any questions. Gibson asks a question, and she gives an answer that has nothing to do with the question that was asked. I especially liked when ABC showed Puppet Palin holding up the T-Shirt for the Bridge To Nowhere that she is now claiming she was against. Typical full of shit politician! Apparently, even way the fuck up in Alaska these politicians learn the number one rule of politics...lie your ass off, no matter how moronic you end up looking when the truth is revealed. I can only hope that one of these days, our great nation finds respectable politicians. This country has NEVER needed "change" more, and I don't believe any of the four of these people belong anywhere near The White House!


John from Boston

Which version of the interview did you watch??? The ABC News version shown early in the evening or the Nightline one?

The Nightline one was edited far less and more of her answers came out, they weren't hacked up to only give partial views.

[7 Wishes]

EVERYONE here...and I mean EVERYONE sees what a piece of worthless propaganda machinery you are.

Fuck you, Stuart. Go to hell, you retarded troglodyte.

YOU and the three or four other neo-Nazi neo-cons who have your subversive masturbatory dialogs on this board are all woven from the same cheaply produced cloth.

YOU are the ones who glean your ultra-right wing blogs and message boards for false information which you then pathetically attempt to convey as truth. When anyone with a conscience and a reasonable amount of intelligence comes along - such as TNC, Deano, or me - you AVOID whichever statements completely disprove the bile you're attempting to shove down everyone's throats and simply go back to your brainless cut-and-paste tactics.

The three or four ultra-right wackos here - and you know who you are, Barbara, Stuart, and Franklin - believe that they can dominate the discussion and change the truth by NEVER addressing any actual issues, but re-directing the discourse. You DISTRACT everyone from arriving at logical conclusions by attacking people's characters.

You three have been assassinating Obama here on a daily basis. So TNC and I come on here and fully disseminate your bullshit, prove your "facts" are contrived, and instead of admitting (God forbid) an occasional lapse of judgment or an error in logic, you set your attack dogs on us. This is why half the country and almost the entire rest of the world thinks American neo-cons such as you (NOT Republicans) are full of shit, terrifying, and dead wrong in their thinking and approaches on both domestic and international issues.

[Enigma869]

Which version of the interview did you watch??? The ABC News version shown early in the evening or the Nightline one?

The Nightline one was edited far less and more of her answers came out, they weren't hacked up to only give partial views.

I'm watching the interview on 20/20 right now. Apparently, it is the entire interview that was broadcast over several days (at least that is what ABC claims). Gibson just asked her what her opinion was on embryonic stem cell research and waited and waited and waited for an answer. He finally said to her "I'm still not clear what your position is". Gibson talked about how her state of Alaska (under her leadership) gets more earmarks per capita than most states in the country. The state gets over $220 per citizen, for earmarks, while Obama's home state gets less than 10% of that. When he challenged her on that point and stated that McCain is completely against all of these earmarks (which even I know to be true of McCain), she looked confused and really didn't have an answer. Listen...I'm not a Democrat or a Republican, and I think this interview just makes Palin look like a fool. The amazing thing for me is that the registered Republicans will come out and say how great she was during the interview. I'm not sure how anyone can listen to this and objectively believe that she comes across looking competent to lead the free world! Hell, she doesn't even agree with her running mate on many issues.

Okay...After listening to the entire interview, she finally came out with two clear thoughts. I thought her response to the troopergate question and the ban on library books were very straight-forward. I don't know if her answers were honest, but it's the only time she seemed close to being sure of herself. Those were the only questions she was asked, that she seemingly had answers for. So, of all the questions posed to her, I give her credit for two straight-forward answers. During the rest of the interview, she couldn't have looked less comfortable if she tried!


John from Boston

[Monker]

Dude have you ever READ what they are wanting to teach KINDERGARTENERS?!

*K through 12*. NOT KINDEGARTENERS.

Geez, do they need to have a fucking bill for every grade level to keep you conservatives happy?

And you dodged the question...it's ok for the liberals to crucify Sarah Palin but it's not ok for McCain-Palin to fight back?? Bullshit...if someone comes at you swinging you swing right back.

I have not seen Obama 'crucify' Sarah Palin. I have not seen Biden 'crucify' Sarah Palinl. McCain tossed his honor in solitary when he approved those ads and approved of Palin's remarks.

[7 Wishes]

Did you actually READ the loathesome stuff said about her and her family written by the liberal bloggers the DAY of and the DAY after she was introduced at the VP choice?
How about what that nasty chairperson of the SC Democrat party said about her only qualification being she hadn't had an abortion?

Man...you think the right is nasty? You and the hard left fucks are simply repulsive.

Right, Stuart. Truthful statements about her hypocrisy and poor decision-making as governor are MUCH worse than people on this board who merely call him a socialist, a communist, an America-hating Muslim, or a monkey.

Ass fucking hole.

[RossValoryRocks]

Did you actually READ the loathesome stuff said about her and her family written by the liberal bloggers the DAY of and the DAY after she was introduced at the VP choice?
How about what that nasty chairperson of the SC Democrat party said about her only qualification being she hadn't had an abortion?

Man...you think the right is nasty? You and the hard left fucks are simply repulsive.

Right, Stuart. Truthful statements about her hypocrisy and poor decision-making as governor are MUCH worse than people on this board who merely call him a socialist, a communist, an America-hating Muslim, or a monkey.

Ass fucking hole.

Hiya pot nice to meet you I am kettle!

I hope Obama gets elected, and when you see what the Obama-Biden and Democrat controlled congress do to you and this country i will come back and laugh. If I can still afford internet service given what the economy is going to be like when they get done with it.

[conversationpc]

So the big thing that the libs are working on this morning is that Palin didn't know what Gibson was talking about when he asked her about the Bush Doctrine. What do you all think about that?

I think she made herself look foolish by not wanting to admit she didn't know what he was talking about...and ended up attempting to answer the question three times.

I heard this talked about earlier this evening. They showed that Gibson himself had associated the Bush doctrine with something different at least twice. In other words Gibson doesn't even agree with himself all the time. Regardless, the Bush doctrine has shifted several times since 2002, so it's not surprising that she would ask for clarification.

Also, from Charles Krauthammer, who coined the phrase "Bush Doctrine" as mentioned earlier on this page...

"At times visibly nervous . . . Ms. Palin most visibly stumbled when she was asked by Mr. Gibson if she agreed with the Bush doctrine. Ms. Palin did not seem to know what he was talking about. Mr. Gibson, sounding like an impatient teacher, informed her that it meant the right of 'anticipatory self-defense.' "

-- New York Times, Sept. 12

Informed her? Rubbish.

The New York Times got it wrong. And Charlie Gibson got it wrong.

There is no single meaning of the Bush doctrine. In fact, there have been four distinct meanings, each one succeeding another over the eight years of this administration -- and the one Charlie Gibson cited is not the one in common usage today. It is utterly different.

He asked Palin, "Do you agree with the Bush doctrine?"

She responded, quite sensibly to a question that is ambiguous, "In what respect, Charlie?"

Sensing his "gotcha" moment, Gibson refused to tell her. After making her fish for the answer, Gibson grudgingly explained to the moose-hunting rube that the Bush doctrine "is that we have the right of anticipatory self-defense."

Wrong.

I know something about the subject because, as the Wikipedia entry on the Bush doctrine notes, I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush doctrine...

The article goes on to explain the various incarnations of the Bush Doctrine, some of which are radically different from the others.

[conversationpc]

On another note, I challenge the denizens of this thread to cut the name-calling. I'm willing to do so. 7 Wishes and whoever else is accusing the other side of being worse than the other, it's ridiculous. You are just as bad as the other name-callers and vice versa. I apologize for my part in it.

[7 Wishes]

On another note, I challenge the denizens of this thread to cut the name-calling. I'm willing to do so. 7 Wishes and whoever else is accusing the other side of being worse than the other, it's ridiculous. You are just as bad as the other name-callers and vice versa. I apologize for my part in it.

I notice you didn't have the courage to call anyone ELSE by name, even though they've been after me since I made it clear I'm a Democrat. Seriously, Dave, I appreciate the sincerity behind your post, but if you're just going to call ME out and let everyone else go unnamed, it's really pointless.

[conversationpc]

On another note, I challenge the denizens of this thread to cut the name-calling. I'm willing to do so. 7 Wishes and whoever else is accusing the other side of being worse than the other, it's ridiculous. You are just as bad as the other name-callers and vice versa. I apologize for my part in it.

I notice you didn't have the courage to call anyone ELSE by name, even though they've been after me since I made it clear I'm a Democrat. Seriously, Dave, I appreciate the sincerity behind your post, but if you're just going to call ME out and let everyone else go unnamed, it's really pointless.

Look, I've called other conservatives out by name on this board before, including RedWingFan....Anyway how about Stu, TNC, etc...You were the last one whose post I read, so I used your name.

[RossValoryRocks]

I will stop when 7Wishes et al. stop.

I tried to be civil before...it didn't work.

I will try again.

[7 Wishes]

Truce.

We'll agree to disagree. After all, we do all love the same music. I'll stop calling you troglodytes if you stop calling me a liberal moron.

[RossValoryRocks]

Truce.

We'll agree to disagree. After all, we do all love the same music. I'll stop calling you troglodytes if you stop calling me a liberal moron.

Well if the shoes fit...from a Right-Wing Trog (I like short version) to a liberal moron...Truce.

[7 Wishes]

OK, now I need to know something.

Stone Cold IS "Stunning Steve" from the late 80's, right?

[Lula]

so it's safe to come back in?

i'm disappointed that john mccain has allowed the smears and lies to become an integral part of his campaign. the john mccain of days gone by.... the mccain feingold campaign finance reform, the true 'maverick' mccain would not have behaved this way. he has let too many bush people in and it has taken over. six degrees of karl rove? now barack obama will let the 527s get dirty and that totally sucks. so much for changing the tone. i do hope obama continues to do what has brought him this far and continues to talk about what matters to most americans- the economy, health care, the wars, education, the environment..... bring on those debates!

as for palin. she has become an annoying distraction. first she has more experience, blah blah blah. john mccain spoke of mayors and governors during the primary and basically blew the experience thing out of the water while debating the other candidates. she has clearly participated in politics as usual- earmarks, bridge to nowhere for it before against it.... at this point so what. she is on the ticket and there is nothing we can do about it. i am not a supporter of palin because she is a woman. i'm an independent and gender is hardly going to sway me. biden has done more for women than mccain palin combined. i just want the protective shield around her removed so the people can get to know the real palin. mccain did not do his job in vetting her so the media is doing it, let it go. it is a little frightening to say the least that he made such a huge decision based on little research.

let us bring the focus back on the presidential candidates and stop the distractions.

[Barb]

Updated EC map

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls ... vs_mccain/

[separate_wayz]

mccain did not do his job in vetting her so the media is doing it, let it go. it is a little frightening to say the least that he made such a huge decision based on little research.

I'm thinking there's a lot of Democratic delegates and voters who are feeling the same way right now -- about Barack Obama. A number of Democrats are already expressing "buyer's remorse" about having chosen Obama as their candidate and standard-bearer.

Like you said, focus on the presidential candidates. And, with that focus, Obama is truly the candidate who seems untested and unvetted. What's worse (for him), he's gotten completely sidetracked off his message (to the extent that he had one) and has gone negative way too early, thereby invalidating a good part of his earlier optimistic tone.

If history is any guide, McCain will win -- because the candidate (in contemporary times) who leads after both conventions always wins the general election. The conventions "settle things".

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/conventio ... ontext.php

[Lula]

mccain did not do his job in vetting her so the media is doing it, let it go. it is a little frightening to say the least that he made such a huge decision based on little research.

I'm thinking there's a lot of Democratic delegates and voters who are feeling the same way right now -- about Barack Obama. A number of Democrats are already expressing "buyer's remorse" about having chosen Obama as their candidate and standard-bearer.

Like you said, focus on the presidential candidates. And, with that focus, Obama is truly the candidate who seems untested and unvetted. What's worse (for him), he's gotten completely sidetracked off his message (to the extent that he had one) and has gone negative way too early, thereby invalidating a good part of his earlier optimistic tone.

If history is any guide, McCain will win -- because the candidate (in contemporary times) who leads after both conventions always wins the general election. The conventions "settle things".

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/conventio ... ontext.php

lol, obama has been vetted and vetted some more. he has been on the campaign trail for 18 months sharing his vision. unaware of this "buyer's remorse" you speak of. i've been on board since day one, though i did waffle between him and hillary with the feeling that both candidates would be a good choice. gone negative way too early? he has not gone negative, lol. he thinks he did with the ad released yesterday about more of the same, but that is so light weight in comparison to mccain's mud. obama is on message. he now has to get dirty because mccain set that tone.

[treetopovskaya]

i think the media does more of the smearing than anyone else.

[conversationpc]

she has clearly participated in politics as usual- earmarks, bridge to nowhere for it before against it....

Actually, no. I heard it reported last night (can't remember what show it was) that she visited the area where the bridge was to be built to express support for the AREA the bridge would have been built in. They said she mildly supported it at the time but never publically supported it and ended up being against it. In other words, there was never really any major push or support for it. It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned and the liberals are making more of a fuss over it than it really should be.

biden has done more for women than mccain palin combined.

I find this really hard to believe.

mccain did not do his job in vetting her so the media is doing it, let it go. it is a little frightening to say the least that he made such a huge decision based on little research.

Also not true. She underwent the same vetting process that the campaign put all the other candidates through, which the governor from Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty, said was extensive.

[annie89509]

I watched excerpts on Nightline over 2 evenings. I agree, Palin didn't come across too well. But I also think it was more of an interrogation than interview. It's hard to be articulate when you're on the defensive from the get-go. CGibson is known as a mild-mannered fair guy. I don't think the RP expected him to be so tough when they granted him this first interview with Palin. He certainly was nice to BObama in his interview -- there are many things to question him about, also .... his past associations with unsavory characters, for instance.

I certainly don't think it's a conscious decision of some in the media (discounting the bloggers as media in this context) to go after Palin, I just think it's her social beliefs that are making a lot of liberals dislike her.

Funny, I would say 90% of my peer group grew up as liberals idolizing the Kennedy Bros. and the democratic ideals. But, then you grow up and have adult finances and responsibilities. When you start having 60% (or more) of your hard-earned cash going to the government (fed, state, city coffers), with sizeable budgets being allocated for entitlement programs and prison systems, you start changing from being a liberal to a conservative, over time.

Sympathy and compassion for those less fortunate than yourself is a good trait, but try giving up the good lifestyle one is accustomed to -- and rightfully earned through responsible labor -- is another thing. Obama talks about universal healthcare for every living person (or maybe it's just citizens, I'm not sure). My question is where will the money come from to fund this? Certainly, not from the poor or low-income. And the wealthy rich have their lawyers and accountants to manage tax loopholes so their share is a drop in the bucket (for them). It will be the middle-class that will feel it the most in their pocketbook, I'm sure. His statement about giving tax breaks to 95% of Americans is just hot air, something a politician says to get elected. We've all heard far-reaching promises before.

Can't wait for the debates! Palin is said to be a quick study. This encounter with Gibson should sharpen her for Biden.

[Lula]

she has clearly participated in politics as usual- earmarks, bridge to nowhere for it before against it....

Actually, no. I heard it reported last night (can't remember what show it was) that she visited the area where the bridge was to be built to express support for the AREA the bridge would have been built in. They said she mildly supported it at the time but never publically supported it and ended up being against it. In other words, there was never really any major push or support for it. It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned and the liberals are making more of a fuss over it than it really should be.

biden has done more for women than mccain palin combined.

I find this really hard to believe.

mccain did not do his job in vetting her so the media is doing it, let it go. it is a little frightening to say the least that he made such a huge decision based on little research.

Also not true. She underwent the same vetting process that the campaign put all the other candidates through, which the governor from Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty, said was extensive.

when did she undergo this extensive vetting process? all chatter i've heard and most of this was on fox not msnbc was he was hell bent on lieberman and was shot down, last minute- palin.

her gubernatorial debate tapes show her saying she would not stand in the way regarding the bridge and there is the whole campaigning and pictures with ted stevens who was all for the bridge. the state kept the earmarked money. i don't care about this only that she has made it an issue because she has not been truthful.

joe biden is responsible for the most extensive legislation regarding domestic violence.

[separate_wayz]

she has clearly participated in politics as usual- earmarks, bridge to nowhere for it before against it....

Actually, no. I heard it reported last night (can't remember what show it was) that she visited the area where the bridge was to be built to express support for the AREA the bridge would have been built in. They said she mildly supported it at the time but never publically supported it and ended up being against it. In other words, there was never really any major push or support for it. It's a non-issue as far as I'm concerned and the liberals are making more of a fuss over it than it really should be.

biden has done more for women than mccain palin combined.

I find this really hard to believe.

mccain did not do his job in vetting her so the media is doing it, let it go. it is a little frightening to say the least that he made such a huge decision based on little research.

Also not true. She underwent the same vetting process that the campaign put all the other candidates through, which the governor from Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty, said was extensive.

Can't wait for more details and anecdotes about Barack Obama's affiliation with ACORN and other scumbag groups in Chicago. If one cites being a "community organizer" as a basis for being president, then one should be prepared for a full explanation of what that entails ...... (answer: voter registration fraud, corporate shakedowns, mortgage fraud, etc., etc., etc. ...... )

If I were a betting man, I'd guess that there's far more scummy details about political backgrounds in Chicago than Anchorage .....

Getting "vetted" in October, in public, is very embarrassing .... but entertaining for the rest of us .....

[Lula]

okay i'll submit, palin was vetted. does that mean people aren't allowed to ask questions?

as for acorn, you're right- st. louis and seattle chapters were busted for voter fraud and there have been indictments. the motor voter bill is a good bill, imo and not voter fraud at all. i like grassroots community organizations. if barack obama has broken the law, please enlighten me.

[conversationpc]

when did she undergo this extensive vetting process? all chatter i've heard and most of this was on fox not msnbc was he was hell bent on lieberman and was shot down, last minute- palin.

She underwent the process at the same time all the other finalists were vetted.

her gubernatorial debate tapes show her saying she would not stand in the way regarding the bridge and there is the whole campaigning and pictures with ted stevens who was all for the bridge. the state kept the earmarked money. i don't care about this only that she has made it an issue because she has not been truthful.

Who knows...Not standing in the way isn't quite supporting it. I'd have to see the tapes, though.

joe biden is responsible for the most extensive legislation regarding domestic violence.

Cool...I actually remember hearing about it before but had forgotten.

[Lula]

you're alright dave, not scary like they say

[Lula]

[RossValoryRocks]

:roll:

Open mind Lu...which believe it or not I do have!

Check your PM.

[Lula]

programs offering college help for serving your community are a good idea. we have quite a few teach for america people working in our school (public, inner city los angeles). absolutely nothing wrong with promoting social justice. i went to LMU, both grad and undergrad and social justice is part of the university's mission. gotta love the catholics (i'm one, sort of)