Obama Presidency Discussion Thread

[L_Hamilton]

I got the link... ESPN did a story on her. Looks like she has a 240SX.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/e60/news/story?id=3571491

Still totally epic.

yes... i must say this is truely badass. gotta love the theme of how our potential first lady is all for cars and especially the racing aspect. weeeeeeee!
Fast cars, hot women, and guns. Finally, a White House that represents us. ;-)

 

[wrcsti]

yes... i must say this is truely badass. gotta love the theme of how our potential first lady is all for cars and especially the racing aspect. weeeeeeee!
Fast cars, hot women, and guns. Finally, a White House that represents us. ;-)

Yeah now they just need younger people doing those things.

 

[forza2.0]

wow, to thing people will vote for mccain because of her.

 

[Solid Fro]

Wow, Palin answered correctly.

The Bush Doctrine describes various foreign policy principles, there is no definite set of rules. It was a trick question by Gibson.

I guarantee you, forza 2.0, didn't know the Bush Doctrine was before this interview.

 

[Joey D]

Watching the Daily Show rerun tonight I couldn't help but laugh at some of the conservative talk show hosts and Palin for being caught being hypocritical. This is not to say you wouldn't see the same thing from the liberal camp but it just goes to show how full of crap all politicians are and their fanboys (and girls!).

===

I've been having conversations with many people at school and it seems the general thoughts seems to be most students like Obama, but at the same time tell me they aren't going to bother to vote because they can not find a candidate they really agree with. I'm not going to tell people they should vote, we live in a country where it's strictly optional and if you choose not to then that's your prerogative. What do you guys think about this? If you can't find someone you support should you just not vote?

The more I think about the more I'm favouring this option. Yes, I could vote for a third party (even though I can't really find one I support, the more I read about Barr the more I dislike him), but I want to be realistic too. The choice will be between Obama and McCain, both of which I think are completely incapable of running this country affectively, so why should I vote for either of them? This is not to say I won't show up on election day, there are plenty of important local things that need my attention, mainly dealing with who supports and does not support the Big Three Bailout Loan.

===

Oh and the more I read about Palin the more I dislike her quite a bit. I feel if McCain died in office, which has a possibility due to his age and health, I wouldn't want her leading the US. She's about as qualified as Obama is, which really isn't saying much. This is not to say I am sexiest about the whole thing. A woman could do just as good of a job as a man could while in office, just the same as a black man would do just as good of a job as a white one.

 

[Omnis]

Oh and the more I read about Palin the more I dislike her quite a bit. I feel if McCain died in office, which has a possibility due to his age and health, I wouldn't want her leading the US. She's about as qualified as Obama is, which really isn't saying much. This is not to say I am sexiest about the whole thing. A woman could do just as good of a job as a man could while in office, just the same as a black man would do just as good of a job as a white one.

Okay, I know what you're trying to say and I more or less agree, but this last paragraph really struck me. What you set forth in writing says that the premise of your conclusion that she is as qualified as Obama is that a woman could do just as good a job as a black man. This is totally irrelevant to qualification and gives you a bad argument.

 

[ND4SPD]

On an interesting side note. Cindy McCain.......A Mad tyte drifter yo!
http://sports.espn.go.com/broadband/video/videopage?videoId=3577389&categoryId=3060647&n8pe6c=1

 

[YSSMAN]

Wow, Palin answered correctly.

Really? I don't think so.

The Bush Doctrine describes various foreign policy principles, there is no definite set of rules.

*sigh*

...Its not even worth arguing in this thread, is it?

It was a trick question by Gibson.

Really? I don't think so. That was a slow-ball, and I'm surprised she had to muddle-through it all that hard. Lemme guess, those left-wing bastards at ABC are "out to get her" too? A tough question is always a "trick question," no matter who asks it?

Sorry for asking questions, please continue to beat us over the head until we all vote for you.

---------------------

What do you guys think about this? If you can't find someone you support should you just not vote?

I'd say no. One of the critical parts of any campaign is forming enough of a coalition to bring in voters who may be on the fringe of a given topic, or possibly alienated by another one. Its not about agreeing with a candidate on every single issue, because quite frankly, it will never occur... But to find one that matches your ideals enough to make it a reasonable decision.

That, and we have important ballot issues here in Michigan this year. The change in the state income tax (moving to a consumption tax), medical marijuana, and the proposal to change our legislature to one that is part-time should encourage them to get out a bit... I don't care who they vote for (well, I'd prefer Obama, lol), but I think its important enough on state issues alone.

The choice will be between Obama and McCain, both of which I think are completely incapable of running this country affectively, so why should I vote for either of them?

First things first, its important to note that it is Congress that has a far-greater effect on your life than the President ever will, but it is nevertheless very important to get one into office who will do less (relative) damage than the other. That is not to say that voting third-party is a "waste," but that by doing so you're giving what may be the "more evil" option of the "lesser evils" that much more of a shot at winning the White House.

I'd choose to look at it this way: Which of the more-likely candidates is going to effect your life in a more positive (or less negative) way? Its not the best way to think about it, but in the long-run, unless we drastically alter the way in which we govern ourselves, we're stuck with a two-party system.

This is not to say I am sexiest about the whole thing. A woman could do just as good of a job as a man could while in office, just the same as a black man would do just as good of a job as a white one.

Wazzup with that? I don't think you need to explain that here...

 

[Solid Fro]

*sigh*

...Its not even worth arguing in this thread, is it?

No, but I am right. There are several different versions of the Bush Doctrine. It doesn't mater which one Palin describes, Gibson hates every single one.

[/done]

 

[Sureboss]

How long until they start comparing Palin to Mrs Thatcher?

How similar are Mrs Palin and Mrs Thatcher?


Seriously, I cannot get over her children's names! Track, brilliant. Wouldn't it be brilliant if he married someone called Field? Kids could be called: Long, Jump, Triple and Hurdle.


Back onto the serious topic:

I may have said this before, but her views worry me and given how frail Mr McCain looks, you wouldn't bet against her being in power within a couple of years if McCain's health deteriorated. Imposing her outdated views on American society would help no one.

 

[Solid Fro]

Thatcher = Palin?

At least in the UK, they have already been comparing the two women. The reason why McCain looks frail is because the North Vietnamese beat the **** out of him.

 

[forza2.0]

Thatcher = Palin?

At least in the UK, they have already been comparing the two women. The reason why McCain looks frail is because the North Vietnamese beat the **** out of him.

wow. You will make any old excuse for mcain and palin. Quite frankly she didnt answer well at all. The woman came across as clueless just skipping around a question I doubt she understood. And no I didnt know what the bush doctrine is, its not my job to, it is however palins.

 

[Tornado]

I'd say no. One of the critical parts of any campaign is forming enough of a coalition to bring in voters who may be on the fringe of a given topic, or possibly alienated by another one. Its not about agreeing with a candidate on every single issue, because quite frankly, it will never occur... But to find one that matches your ideals enough to make it a reasonable decision.

I disagree. I don't support voting apathy, but I don't like the idea of people voting for a candidate just because he is "close" to their own sets of ideals.

 

[Joey D]

I'd say no. One of the critical parts of any campaign is forming enough of a coalition to bring in voters who may be on the fringe of a given topic, or possibly alienated by another one. Its not about agreeing with a candidate on every single issue, because quite frankly, it will never occur... But to find one that matches your ideals enough to make it a reasonable decision.

The candidate that most closely matches what important to me is Obama, however it doesn't match it enough for me to want to jump up and down from him. Which is why I feel as if I should abstain from voting for president.

That, and we have important ballot issues here in Michigan this year. The change in the state income tax (moving to a consumption tax), medical marijuana, and the proposal to change our legislature to one that is part-time should encourage them to get out a bit... I don't care who they vote for (well, I'd prefer Obama, lol), but I think its important enough on state issues alone.

Yup, that's why I will still go to the polls whether I vote for president or not. I hate our county commissioner with a passion and I am very outspoken again him (I've wrote letters to the paper about it a couple of times). He's been caught drunk driving and got away with it as well. I will do anything to vote him out of office. Plus he's big with urban sprawl and I like my country area.

First things first, its important to note that it is Congress that has a far-greater effect on your life than the President ever will, but it is nevertheless very important to get one into office who will do less (relative) damage than the other. That is not to say that voting third-party is a "waste," but that by doing so you're giving what may be the "more evil" option of the "lesser evils" that much more of a shot at winning the White House.[/qutoe]

I realise Congress has a big say in everything but the president is the figure head for it all. When Congress messes up in the public's opinion it's the president being put through the ringer about it quite a bit of the time.

I'd choose to look at it this way: Which of the more-likely candidates is going to effect your life in a more positive (or less negative) way? Its not the best way to think about it, but in the long-run, unless we drastically alter the way in which we govern ourselves, we're stuck with a two-party system.

As I've said, Obama is the closest to what I believe although I would not consider myself a Democrat by any means.

Wazzup with that? I don't think you need to explain that here...

It seems when I get in discussion with people about me not like Palin, I'm instantly labelled sexist. The same thing goes with Obama, when I fault one of his policies I'm labelled a racist.

 

[Omnis]

The candidate that most closely matches what important to me is Obama, however it doesn't match it enough for me to want to jump up and down from him. Which is why I feel as if I should abstain from voting for president.

Then explore the 3rd parties. If you find a more perfect match, then by all means support it. Quite frankly, that is the only option for your views to be considered.

The following is "the agreement" of the 4 (actually 3) 3rd-party candidates. They are Bob Barr (Libertarian), Chuck Baldwin (Constitution), Cynthia McKinney (Green), and Ralph Nader (Independent).

We Agree

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests must be ended. There should be no taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.

That's a good enough start. Look up their platforms in more detail and hopefully you'll find one that suits you.

 

[FoolKiller]

That is not to say that voting third-party is a "waste," but that by doing so you're giving what may be the "more evil" option of the "lesser evils" that much more of a shot at winning the White House.

I'd choose to look at it this way: Which of the more-likely candidates is going to effect your life in a more positive (or less negative) way? Its not the best way to think about it, but in the long-run, unless we drastically alter the way in which we govern ourselves, we're stuck with a two-party system.

The two statements I bolded are in disagreement with each other. People voting third-party are trying to alter how we govern ourselves, and by you basically saying it won't do any good is adding to the problem, not helping.

If everyone quit believing in the hype or voted for actual solid plans, not just "change" then McCain and Obama wouldn't be on the gorram radar.

Anyone who calls a third-party vote a waste or say that you allow the other guy to win, is the exact same as the anyone but Bush camp. The lesser of two evils is still evil. There is no other way around it. Find the candidate that represents you, not the one that isn't the guy you don't like. If you don't like the main candidates and don't know enough about the third-parties then if you want to actually call yourself a responsible voter you will do the research yourself.

WARNING: Researching third-party candidates will require reading more in-depth than just catch phrases like "Change we can believe in." You will likely find yourself reading actual policy proposals. See, third-party candidates aren't wasting their time coming up with cute catch phrases, no they are actually focused on policy.

I honestly believe that if everyone in the US took the time to research third-party candidates the two-party system would end in a single election. But instead we will happily allow ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and Fox to spoon feed us.

I proudly put a Barr car bumper magnet on my Rabbit this week. After repeated comments of, "What's the Libertarian Party?" and "Who is Barr?" I have to say that I am more fed up with the voters in this country than I am the politicians. I get pulled into debates that usually end with their final statement being, "Well it is change from Bush," or "Can you trust a man with Hussein as his middle name?" I just want to slap them.

For the love of God, people, vote for your principles, not to keep the other guy out. We are selling ourselves out to two parties that basically have the same crappy policies with just a few differences here and there that don't mean jack.

As out of place as this is, it reminds me of V for Vendetta when he tells all the people that the condition their country is in is not the fault of any politician or any media personality, but the fault of them, the people. All of them. The blame lies on us, not the parties or the government. WE allowed the government to become what it is.

[/soapbox]


I'll go check my Fantasy Football teams now.

 

[L_Hamilton]

Can I post these here?

 

[Kent]

Thatcher = Palin?

At least in the UK, they have already been comparing the two women. The reason why McCain looks frail is because the North Vietnamese beat the **** out of him.

That's part of it...
More than getting the snot beat out of him, I'd say the aging on McCain comes from 2 broken arms and a broken leg (all at once) during his time as a 6 year prisoner of war.

And in my opinion, as a citation to his character, he was one of the more vocal supporters of the normalization of relations with Vietnam.

 

[YSSMAN]

The two statements I bolded are in disagreement with each other. People voting third-party are trying to alter how we govern ourselves, and by you basically saying it won't do any good is adding to the problem, not helping.

If everyone quit believing in the hype or voted for actual solid plans, not just "change" then McCain and Obama wouldn't be on the gorram radar.

I'm not sure how much you've studied the issue with the party systems here in the US, but because we have a "winner-take-all" style of election, it is the main reason why we've existed with two parties since the age of Jefferson. Even if we elected independent, or green, or "insert party here" leaders to congress, they have to caucus with either the GOP or the Democrats. Because it is of the nature of the GOP or the Democrats to absorb platforms (on the presidential scale) that threaten their dominance, we'll never see the emergence of a strong third party.

What I'm getting at is that until we get rid of the electoral college and move towards proportional representation (as seen in Europe), it is not likely that a third party could hold much power, if any. I'm in favor of the proportional system, as if 30% of the country votes independent, they get 30% of the seats in the house and the senate (and so on). It is not my intent to state that a third party is a waste of a vote, because when a party gains a large percentage of them it begins to change the way in which the GOP or Democrats govern, but more or less to consider whether or not it is a good idea when the stakes are already so high to begin with.

I voted Ron Paul in the GOP primary, which may have been as much of a "third party" vote as ever, but I'm proud of what I did, and I hoped that it changed some people's minds in our state when he showed up and had a larger piece of the vote.

Sorry for the short post... I'm running late for work...

 

[Tornado]

What I'm getting at is that until we get rid of the electoral college and move towards proportional representation (as seen in Europe), it is not likely that a third party could hold much power, if any.

There are two problems with that:

1. The attitude that Foolkiller discussed above is why we only ever have two parties, so it isn't like that by default.
   
2. You'll note that the two political parties that the country had in the first few elections no longer exist, so clearly things can change.

 

[ROAD_DOGG33J]

As out of place as this is, it reminds me of V for Vendetta when he tells all the people that the condition their country is in is not the fault of any politician or any media personality, but the fault of them, the people. All of them. The blame lies on us, not the parties or the government. WE allowed the government to become what it is.

Very well said, but I don't think people will ever realize that.

 

[Solid Fro]

wow. You will make any old excuse for mcain and palin. Quite frankly she didnt answer well at all. The woman came across as clueless just skipping around a question I doubt she understood.

Considering that there are multiple Bush Doctrines, she answered well by saying it's the overall world view of the Bush administration.

And no I didnt know what the bush doctrine is...

Of course not.

its not my job to, it is however palins.

It must be above your pay-grade, right?

That's part of it...
More than getting the snot beat out of him, I'd say the aging on McCain comes from 2 broken arms and a broken leg (all at once) during his time as a 6 year prisoner of war.

Not to mention injuries from ejecting and bayonet wounds when he landed. Someone should explain to the Obama campaign it's the reason why McCain cannot use a computer.

 

[Joey D]

Honestly, I know several people with physical disabilities that can use computers just fine, sure they are fast typist but they can use it. My guess is the McCain is like a majority of people his age when it comes to computers...unwilling to learn it.

 

[forza2.0]

Considering that there are multiple Bush Doctrines, she answered well by saying it's the overall world view of the Bush administration.



Of course not.



It must be above your pay-grade, right?



Not to mention injuries from ejecting and bayonet wounds when he landed. Someone should explain to the Obama campaign it's the reason why McCain cannot use a computer.

She didnt answer well at all. She tried to come across like she knew what she was talking about with conviction but instead spouted crap and skipped around the question. I would have answered the question like that also if I didnt know what the hell he was asking of me. Rose tinted glasses.

What has mcains war injuries got to do with him not being able to use a computer?

 

[eiriksmil]

Palin is a MILF. I don't quite see McCain's argument about Obama's lack of experience with his new vice president though. Just imagine if something happens to McCain and she becomes the new president. Wow.

 

[Joey D]

I don't find Palin attractive at all, but I am afraid many people are going to be voting for McCain based on sole fact they think Palin is good looking...welcome to American politics I suppose. I do agree with the experience issue though, and as I've said there is a really good chance something will happen to McCain. Look at how much Bush has aged from when he took office till now, or even at Clinton. Being the president is no easy job.

 

[homeforsummer]

MILF? Only if creationist wildlife hunters happen to float your boat, I guess...

 

[forza2.0]

Palin is a MILF. I don't quite see McCain's argument about Obama's lack of experience with his new vice president though. Just imagine if something happens to McCain and she becomes the new president. Wow.

God save us.

Out of all the people that live in america the best they come up with is mcain and palin!?

 

[Tornado]

Palin is a MILF. I don't quite see McCain's argument about Obama's lack of experience with his new vice president though.

Being Governor of a state is closer to being President than being a Senator who is known for mostly for showing up to Senate votings.

Just imagine if something happens to McCain and she becomes the new president. Wow.

I don't understand this point of view, and it seems relatively common in what seems to be groups made up of outraged Europeans. I have a strong dislike for Palin, but I can't understand how so many people from outside our country think Palin being potentially president will be the downfall of Western Society.

 

[Solid Fro]

...What has mcains war injuries got to do with him not being able to use a computer?

Honestly, I know several people with physical disabilities that can use computers just fine, sure they are fast typist but they can use it. My guess is the McCain is like a majority of people his age when it comes to computers...unwilling to learn it.

That's incorrect. Here's a Forbes article about McCain's 2000 campaign and technology:

In certain ways, McCain was a natural Web candidate. Chairman of the Senate Telecommunications Subcommittee and regarded as the U.S. Senate’s savviest technologist, McCain is an inveterate devotee of email. His nightly ritual is to read his email together with his wife, Cindy. The injuries he incurred as a Vietnam POW make it painful for McCain to type. Instead, he dictates responses that his wife types on a laptop. “She’s a whiz on the keyboard, and I’m so laborious,” McCain admits.

http://www.forbes.com/asap/2000/0529/053_print.html