US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #7

[anitram]

Not at all, Dread. I was speaking more generally about the media narrative of his maverickness.

Here is the Salon article that I was talking about.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Can anyone give me concrete examples of how and when John McCain was a "maverick"? Other than his general constant pissedoffness

 

[melon]

Is it just me, or are there others out there who are starting to feel completely ambivalent about both of these candidates? Maybe I've been burned too many times by the Democratic Party, but I find it hard to believe that they'll actually follow through with their promises; and, for another, I don't find their promises to be all that spectacular in the first place. For the record, I doubt Hillary or any other candidate would have changed the fact that this party has been unimaginative for as long as I can remember.

And, yet, I can't vote Republican, because they are 10x worse than all the "moral failures" of the Democratic Party combined, whether that be due to incompetence, populist pandering, bigotry, or downright stupidity.

No wonder Americans are so pessimistic these days. Our "choices" these days just aren't that desirable or confidence inspiring.

 

[BVS]

I think the "system", this monster we've helped create, has waterdowned our canidates. The canidates are basically campaigning for the middleground as they carefully try not to piss off their base too much.

I wonder how long this trend will last? It seems to me there is no way a true conservative or true liberal could possibly win this election. Will we continue down this path and have presidential canidates that run almost completely moderate and let the Congress actually play the sides, or will they all eventually start heading towards the middle with only a handful of age old issues giving us our names i.e. abortion.

 

[Irvine511]

Wow, speaking of outrageous.

How pathetic, honestly.

as an aside, what's kind of ironic about this whole thing is that, according to the Bush/Cheney definitions, John McCain was never tortured in Hanoi.

 

[BonosSaint]

Debatable Choices
A trio of news veterans will moderate this fall's presidential debates, but who and what do they represent?

TheRoot.com
Updated: 1:26 PM ET Aug 18, 2008

Aug. 19, 2008--In case you missed it, earlier this month, the Commission on Presidential Debates announced their picks to moderate the three presidential debates this fall. The chosen: NBC's Tom Brokaw, CBS's Bob Schieffer and PBS's Jim Lehrer.

So, in an election year in which race, gender and generational change have dominated politics and public discourse, the commission decided that these three white men, aged 68, 71 and 74, respectively, are our nation's best choices to question the candidates and represent voter consciousness about the issues? When one—and only one—of the candidates is also a 70-plus-year-old white man?

Don't get it twisted; this is not about hating the players, just the game. The chosen ones are all esteemed journalists and have not only paid their dues but supported a number of younger reporters in their own careers, myself included. No, my criticism is aimed at the tired institutional thinking that automatically defaults to older white men to bring gravitas and credibility to important national events and assumes—wrongly—that the men are somehow free of a perspective shaped by their own life circumstances and life stories.

Think about it. What if the commission, a non-partisan, non-profit group that has sponsored all presidential and vice presidential debates since 1988, had picked three 40-something African Americans to moderate all three debates? No matter how much experience and name recognition those journalists brought with them, people would question whether, as a group, they represent the full range of views and perspectives in the American electorate, and indeed whether such a lineup was fair to both candidates.

At a press conference announcing the decision, the commission's executive director, Janet Brown, said the moderators were chosen because they are "very serious." "I don't want to know how many decades collectively they represent in the news business," she said.

Well, if seriousness and experience are most important, in what universe does PBS's Gwen Ifill not qualify? The commission has tapped her for a second time to moderate the vice presidential debate. How, then, can she not have the experience to moderate one of three presidential matchups? And if my perception is clouded by my longtime friendship with Ifill, then how about 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl, who knows what it's like to break into the boy's club as much as Hillary Clinton did? What about Katie Couric, one of the best interviewers in the business? What about the award-winning CBS journalist Byron Pitts? What about CNN's Soledad O'Brien, whose reporting and interviewing chops have been tested in every format from live morning television to long-form documentary? What about Ruben Navarette, an award-winning syndicated columnist whose politics defy categorization? What about Ray Suarez of PBS, whose easy facility with issues from urban planning to international affairs have made him a sought after moderator across the country? What about Univision's Jorge Ramos, who was one of the youngest major network anchors, and thus, now one of the most experienced? What about Anderson Cooper, a rising star at CNN who would bring extensive international experience along with a generational point of view more in line with a growing and intensely engaged portion of the electorate?

The first debate, to be held Sept. 26 at the University of Mississippi and to be moderated by Lehrer, will focus on domestic policy. Brokaw will host the second on Oct. 7, a town-hall-style matchup with audience and Internet questions at Belmont University in Tennessee. The third, to focus on foreign policy, will be moderated by Schieffer at Hofstra University in New York.

The commissioners want to make these debates about the "issues." But deciding exactly what is an issue and what priority to assign them is itself a matter of opinion, perception and experience.

Earlier this year when Obama brushed his shoulders off in response to a political attack, few people under 50, certainly not most blacks, viewed it as a sexist gesture; most viewed it as a hip-hop reference to "brushing off the haters." But 73-year-old Geraldine Ferraro didn't see it that way and complained about it for weeks. When Sen. Clinton made her remarks, early in the primaries, about how MLK and the civil rights leaders needed politicians like LBJ to actually get the legislation in place, the campaigns argued for weeks (and in some ways are still arguing) about who was playing the race card and who was playing it straight. Who gets to decide what issues are important?

Surprisingly, the commission itself is somewhat diverse. The panel includes the former president of Howard University, H. Patrick Swygert, and the lawyer and activist Antonia Hernandez. Former Clinton administration press secretary Mike McCurry, a baby boomer, is among them. Did this group consciously decide to ignore or dismiss people of color and women because of their race, gender or age. Unlikely. Did they assume a non-white, under-60 journalist would be so dazzled by Obama or so freaked out by the national spotlight that they couldn't think straight and play fair? Hard to imagine.

What the commission did do, it seems, is default to thinking of older white men as institutional standard-bearers that automatically convey universality, objectivity and credibility. But older white men are people, too, and just like younger people, women and non-whites, they come with worldviews, prejudices, perspectives and life stories that inform their understanding of issues. Wouldn't everyone have been better served if the three debates were led by a combination of moderators that better reflected the diverse life experience of the candidates, as well as the potent richness of the electorate?

TV Week's Michele Greppi asked commission co-chairman Frank Fahrenkopf what kind of feedback he was getting about the quartet of moderators, and he said ..."Absolutely nothing but positive remarks . . . from the general political realm."

The general political realm? Who would that be, Frank? I think we know.

Who would you like to see moderate?

 

[anitram]

I don't know whom I'd like to see but the idea that Katie Couric is one of the best interviewers in the business is hilarious.

 

[BonosSaint]

I did get a bit of a chuckle of that myself.

 

[Strongbow]

McCain takes 5-point lead over Obama
Poll: Republican seen as a stronger manager of the economy



WASHINGTON - In a sharp turnaround, Republican John McCain has opened a 5-point lead on Democrat Barack Obama in the U.S. presidential race and is seen as a stronger manager of the economy, according to a Reuters/Zogby poll released on Wednesday.

McCain leads Obama among likely U.S. voters by 46 percent to 41 percent, wiping out Obama's solid 7-point advantage in July and taking his first lead in the monthly Reuters/Zogby poll.

The reversal follows a month of attacks by McCain, who has questioned Obama's experience, criticized his opposition to most new offshore oil drilling and mocked his overseas trip.

The poll was taken Thursday through Saturday as Obama wrapped up a weeklong vacation in Hawaii that ceded the political spotlight to McCain, who seized on Russia's invasion of Georgia to emphasize his foreign policy views.

"There is no doubt the campaign to discredit Obama is paying off for McCain right now," pollster John Zogby said. "This is a significant ebb for Obama."

McCain now has a 9-point edge, 49 percent to 40 percent, over Obama on the critical question of who would be the best manager of the economy -- an issue nearly half of voters said was their top concern in the November 4 presidential election.



That margin reversed Obama's 4-point edge last month on the economy over McCain, an Arizona senator and former Vietnam prisoner of war who has admitted a lack of economic expertise and shows far greater interest in foreign and military policy.

McCain has been on the offensive against Obama during the last month over energy concerns, with polls showing strong majorities supporting his call for an expansion of offshore oil drilling as gasoline prices hover near $4 a gallon.

Obama had opposed new offshore drilling, but said recently he would support a limited expansion as part of a comprehensive energy program.

That was one of several recent policy shifts for Obama, as he positions himself for the general election battle. But Zogby said the changes could be taking a toll on Obama's support, particularly among Democrats and self-described liberals.

Obama's support among Democrats fell 9 percentage points this month to 74 percent, while McCain has the backing of 81 percent of Republicans. Support for Obama, an Illinois senator, fell 12 percentage points among liberals, with 10 percent of liberals still undecided compared to 9 percent of conservatives.

Obama's support among voters between the ages of 18 and 29, which had been one of his strengths, slipped 12 percentage points to 52 percent. McCain, who will turn 72 next week, was winning 40 percent of younger voters.

It made little difference when independent candidate Ralph Nader and Libertarian Party candidate Bob Barr, who are both trying to add their names to state ballots.

McCain still held a 5-point edge over Obama, 44 percent to 39 percent, when all four names were included. Barr earned 3 percent and Nader 2 percent.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26308429

The Zogby poll is not the most accurate poll, but because it tends to slightly lean left, the current results are interesting. Across all polls, the race at this point is the tightest it has ever been.

The realclearpolitics electoral college map has gone from McCain losing by a electoral landslide back in July, to McCain winning 274 to 264. Colorado has surprisingly turned red for the first time in the race on their chart. The results are based on the average of all state polls.

You can take a look at the map here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=10


But a lot of changes are in store for the race over the next two weeks. The VP's will finally be known and both party's will have their conventions. Still, this is not the position Obama wanted to be in going into the convention.

One thing is clear, there is certainly no evidence of an Obama Tsunami like victory in November. McCain surprisingly seems to have the advantage now, although its unknown if this will be sustainable.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I saw his house in Arizona that's on the market-on Inside Edition. It's gorgeous.


politico.com

McCain unsure how many houses he owns
By: Jonathan Martin and Mike Allen



August 21, 2008 06:55 AM EST

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said in an interview Wednesday that he was uncertain how many houses he and his wife, Cindy, own.

"I think - I'll have my staff get to you," McCain told us in Las Cruces, N.M. "It's condominiums where - I'll have them get to you."

The correct answer is at least four, located in Arizona, California and Virginia, according to his staff. Newsweek estimated this summer that the couple owns at least seven properties.

In recent weeks, Democrats have stepped up their effort to caricature McCain as living an outlandishly rich lifestyle – a bit of payback to the GOP for portraying Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) as an elitist, and for turning the spotlight in 2004 on the five homes owned by Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry.

Pro-Obama labor groups have sent out mailers highlighting McCain’s wealth, and prominent Democrats have included references to it in comments to reporters.

Twice in the past two weeks, those Democrats have focused on McCain’s houses.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) told Politico’s Ben Smith that it was McCain “who wears $500 shoes, has six houses, and comes from one of the richest families in his state."

And David Axelrod, Obama’s chief strategist, referred in an interview with Adam Nagourney of The New York Times to an imagined meeting of McCain strategists “on the portico of the McCain estate in Sedona — or maybe in one of his six other houses.”

McCain’s comments came four days after he initially told Pastor Rick Warren during a faith forum on Sunday his threshold for considering someone rich is $5 million — a careless comment he quickly corrected.

In the interview, McCain did not offer an alternative number, but had a new answer ready.

“I define rich in other ways besides income,” he said. “Some people are wealthy and rich in their lives and their children and their ability to educate them. Others are poor if they’re billionaires.”

McCain, by anyone's measure, is well off if you include his wife's fortune. Cindy McCain inherited control of her father’s beer distributorship, the largest in Arizona, and has an estimated worth of over $100 million.

 

[BVS]

I understand Presidents will hire staff to be experts and advisors in certain fields, but needing staff to know how many houses you own?

 

[anitram]

McCain can't count his houses but the black man raised by a single mother is an elitist. I really do quite admire the Republicans for being able to set the narrative so effectively regardless of how absolutely ridiculous it is.

 

[Irvine511]

I really do quite admire the Republicans for being able to set the narrative so effectively regardless of how absolutely ridiculous it is.

i am astonished as well. the Rovians came on board the McCain campaign and took over, and here we are.

it should be noted that McCain once said that there was a special place in Hell for Rove after what he did to McCain and his family in SC in 2000.

but i guess someone would rather win an election than ... well, what's the point, John McCain is the original Maverick who only gives us Straight Talk.

 

[coemgen]

He has 7 houses worth $13 million.

I hope he reads these threads . . .

Seriously — out of touch? Senior moment?

 

[deep]

He has 7 houses

what's one more ?

my name is Barack Obama, and I approve this message.

 

[anitram]

I'm sure that Multiple Mansion McCain will play out well with the public!

 

[deep]

I guess it is not safe to say how many properties I own and what they are worth, and really it does not matter.


McCain has never misrepresented his worth or background.

 

[Irvine511]

McCain has never misrepresented his worth or background.

yet he'll call Obama a celebrity elitist because he mentions the price of arugula?

 

[Irvine511]

McCain Spokesman's Retort: Obama Lives in "a Frickin' Mansion"

By Michael D. Shear
SEDONA, Ariz. -- A spokesman for Sen. John McCain vowed to retaliate against today's story about how many houses the GOP candidate owns with a renewed focus on Sen. Barack Obama's ties to a Chicago developer and charges that Obama is an elitist.

"We're delighted to have a real estate debate with Barack Obama," said spokesman Brian Rogers, adding that the press should focus on Obama's house. "It's a frickin' mansion. He doesn't tell people that. You have a mansion you bought in a shady deal with a convicted felon."

The felon reference was to Tony Rezko, a former Obama friend and financial backer who was convicted on fraud and bribery charges this year. Rogers vowed to intensify efforts to link Obama to Rezko in the coming days.

"That's fair game now," he said. "You are going to see more of that now that this issue has been joined. You'll see more of the Rezko matter from us."

The McCain campaign was in full damage-control mode as the housing story took off today. Rogers tried to play down the story, saying that reports of the many McCain houses were overstated.

"The reality is they have some investment properties and stuff. It's not as if he lives in ten houses. That's just not the case," Rogers said. "The reality is they have four that actually could be considered houses they could use."

Those four include an apartment in Arlington, a ranch in Sedona, and two condos, in California and Phoenix, he said. The others include "some investment properties and things like that."

He also added: "This is a guy who lived in one house for five and a half years -- in prison," referring to the prisoner of war camp that McCain was in during the Vietnam War.

and this is why you should vote for John McCain.

remember: marry wealth, don't earn it by writing elitist snobby books.

 

[namkcuR]

Did anybody catch that McCain basically endorsed re-instating the draft yesterday? It was at some town-hall type thing he was doing, and some lady in the audience said something along the lines of, 'there won't be anyone to chase Bin Laden to the gates of hell unless we re-instate the draft', and McCain responded by saying, 'I don't disagree with anything you just said'.

 

[anitram]

I guess it is not safe to say how many properties I own and what they are worth, and really it does not matter.


McCain has never misrepresented his worth or background.

That's true.

He believes if you make $4.9 million/year you are middle class. I'd say he's pretty consistent about his views in this respect.

 

[Irvine511]

if you would like to see all of the houses owned by John McCain, a prisoner of war, here you go:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0Glia_Vrbc8

 

[deep]

That's true.

He believes if you make $4.9 million/year you are middle class. I'd say he's pretty consistent about his views in this respect.

That is not really true.

But, that answer alone should put to rest the nonsense that he got the questions before hand.

He may not have arrived early enough to go and sit in the green (cone of silence) room.

but, he certainly did not have the questions or he would have been able to give a better answer.

At least he did not say, "That question is above my pay grade."

 

[cm]

At least he did not say, "That question is above my pay grade."

I have heard that phrase used many times in my lifetime, maybe it is a midwestern thing, but it always refers to God. Not a bad answer at all in my opinion.

Here is more of his answer: “Well, I think that whether you’re looking at it from a theological perspective or a scientific perspective, answering that question with specificity, you know, is above my pay grade. But let me just speak more generally about the issue of abortion because this is something obviously the country wrestles with. One thing that I’m absolutely convinced of is there is a moral and ethical content to this issue….” Obama went on to explain how (and why) we can reduce the number of abortions in this country, and why he’s pro-choice.

 

[mobvok]

Did anybody catch that McCain basically endorsed re-instating the draft yesterday? It was at some town-hall type thing he was doing, and some lady in the audience said something along the lines of, 'there won't be anyone to chase Bin Laden to the gates of hell unless we re-instate the draft', and McCain responded by saying, 'I don't disagree with anything you just said'.

Ehh that seems quite unfair. I saw the question and his answer, and the woman basically had a paragraph long question and tacked on the draft bit at the very end. I can't conceive that McCain would want to endorse the draft anyway, it's a poor idea, there's no political support for it, and it would supercharge Obama's youth turnout.

 

[U2DMfan]

One thing is clear, there is certainly no evidence of an Obama Tsunami like victory in November. McCain surprisingly seems to have the advantage now, although its unknown if this will be sustainable.

I searched this forum.
I found exactly one poster who predicted a huge win for Obama.
And even then, he basically qualified it.

The idea that this was ever going to be anything but a close race came out of the Dem primaries, as a reason not to vote for HRC. It was as much a myth then as it is now. That her negatives were too high etc. and Obama would be a fresh face who could 'change' the dynamic. Fucking silly, huh?

What we are seeing is what most pundits (who have a reasonably objective clue) predicted.

 

[Strongbow]

I searched this forum.
I found exactly one poster who predicted a huge win for Obama.
And even then, he basically qualified it.

There has been more than one, but only one that I can recall that refered to it as a "Tsunami".

What we are seeing is what most pundits (who have a reasonably objective clue) predicted.

On the contrary, many pundits are puzzled as to why Obama is not ahead by a significant margin at this point.

 

[BVS]

There has been more than one,

You keep saying this, and you've been called out every time. It simply isn't true.

 

[financeguy]

Would have to back up Strongbow.

Several posters have expressed their view of Obama victory being inevitable.

 

[corianderstem]

I have heard that phrase used many times in my lifetime, maybe it is a midwestern thing, but it always refers to God.

That was my first thought as well when I heard him say it. "Ha ha! He's not god! Good answer!" *crickets chirping*