US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #8 - Page 20 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-08-2008, 04:00 PM   #286
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,489
Local Time: 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post

Why do you continue to hold Sarah Palin to some vague higher standard that you would not hold for Clinton, Kaine, or even Obama?

Again, what interest did Clinton or Kaine show in Foreign Policy prior to them running or being consider for VP or P? Come on now, this is the standard you set, so you must know the answer to this.


this is total BS, and you know it. just go re-read Yolland's post and get back to me when you want to do than make more strained equivocations.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:14 PM   #287
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 01:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
While governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton served as chair of both the National Governors' Association and the Democratic Leadership Council, both national-level organizations; the DLC formulates policy stances on a comprehensive range of US domestic and foreign issues, while the NGA primarily focuses on liaison between the federal and state governments. Jimmy Carter, while governor of Georgia, served as the DNC chair for all congressional and gubernatorial campaigns.

A trip to Germany and Kuwait to pay a social call on your own state's National Guard troops, while a laudable gesture of support, doesn't constitute 'foreign policy experience' nor is it a foreign policy statement.

.
So what Foreign Policy issues did Governor Clinton formulate policy stances on as chair of the Democratic Leadership Council? I'm looking for something specific to him.

What has Tim Kaine been the chair of as Governor of Virginia that would demonstrate his Foreign Policy experience?
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:16 PM   #288
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 01:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
this is total BS, and you know it. just go re-read Yolland's post and get back to me when you want to do than make more strained equivocations.



Why do you refuse to answer questions about Clinton and Kaine that you insist be answered about Palin?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:17 PM   #289
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 09:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Again, what interest did Clinton or Kaine show in Foreign Policy prior to them running or being consider for VP or P? Come on now, this is the standard you set, so you must know the answer to this.
Clinton's college degree came from Georgetown's School of Foreign Service. He had at least a background, if not an interest, in foreign affairs from age 18 on. Being a Georgetown grad myself, I have a lot of friends who were in the SFS...it's no cakewalk. The students in that program have had more debate, research, and product related to foreign affairs than Palin had up to her first weekend as VP pick.

Tim Kaine's position in this argument is, well, irrelevant isn't it? Obama didn't choose him--perhaps precisely because of his lack of foreign policy experience. Obama made a judgment. Some may say it was for political reasons; others may say it was for putting "country first."

Just for kicks: Obama, whose readiness you question but whom you neglect to mention in the foreign policy question (perhaps on purpose), has been chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on European Affairs, as well as on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations and Homeland Security/Governmental Affairs (which, I'm sure, involves discussion of foreign threats, etc.). Debate about how many bills he's worked on or what exact date he'd been present long enough to be President, but even if he slept through all the meetings, he's at least got a little foreign affairs meat on his resume.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:21 PM   #290
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
2861U2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: watching the Cubs
Posts: 4,251
Local Time: 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post

1) obama wins the popular vote by a fairly large margin, thanks to overwhelmingly large turnouts in high population areas (NYC, LA, Chi, etc.) but loses the electoral college.
I think that is very possible. I would be truly stunned is McCain won the popular vote, but clearly EC victory could happen.
__________________
2861U2 is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:23 PM   #291
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 01:09 AM
John McCain is now ahead of Barack Obama by 5 points in the Gallup poll. John McCain currently is supported by 49% of people to Obama's 44% of people.

Gallup's results show that McCain got a 6 point bounce from his convention compared to just a 4 point bounce for Obama. McCain started at 43% just before the convention and moved up to 49% in the first poll consisting of polling done entirely after the convention was over. Obama started at 46% just prior to the Democratic convention and then moved up to 50% after the convention.

Obama is now two points below where he was before both conventions, 46% support prior to the conventions, 44% now.

Gallup Daily: McCain’s Bounce Gives Him 5-Point Lead
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:30 PM   #292
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:09 PM
Within a week, I expect

NH and Colorado to be trending for McCain /Palin
__________________
deep is online now  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:31 PM   #293
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 01:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
Clinton's college degree came from Georgetown's School of Foreign Service. He had at least a background, if not an interest, in foreign affairs from age 18 on. Being a Georgetown grad myself, I have a lot of friends who were in the SFS...it's no cakewalk. The students in that program have had more debate, research, and product related to foreign affairs than Palin had up to her first weekend as VP pick.
So if Clinton had not gone to Georgetown in the 1960s, and instead went to the University of Arkansas and got a degree in communications he would not have been qualified to be President in 1992?


Quote:
Tim Kaine's position in this argument is, well, irrelevant. Obama didn't choose him--perhaps precisely because of his lack of foreign policy experience. Obama made a judgment. Some may say it was for political reasons; others may say it was for putting "country first."
Obama strongly considered Kaine. Kaine was in his top 3 picks, so the fact that he ended up going with Biden is irrelevant considering what were discussing.

Quote:
Just for kicks: Obama, whose readiness you question but whom you neglect to mention in the foreign policy question (perhaps on purpose), has been chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on European Affairs, as well as on the Senate Committees for Foreign Relations and Homeland Security/Governmental Affairs (which, I'm sure, involves discussion of foreign threats, etc.). Debate about how many bills he's worked on or what exact date he'd been present long enough to be President, but even if he slept through all the meetings, he's at least got a little foreign affairs meat on his resume.
I've never stated that Obama is not qualified to be President. But given the scrutiny of Palin, I'm curious as to when others think Obama became Qualified to be President.

Do you think Obama was qualified or "prepared" to be President in January 2007? November 2004? Sometime earlier than November 2004?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:31 PM   #294
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,489
Local Time: 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post


Why do you refuse to answer questions about Clinton and Kaine that you insist be answered about Palin?


Clinton won the Democratic nomination and fielded many specific questions on foreign policy throughout the campaign. unlike Palin, he spoke to the press often.

there is no reason to even discuss Kaine. he was not selected as VP. there's no discussion to have, and the more you bring him up, the more you undercut any sort of argument for Palin.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:36 PM   #295
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 01:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Clinton won the Democratic nomination and fielded many specific questions on foreign policy throughout the campaign. unlike Palin, he spoke to the press often.
I said before he started running for President.



Quote:
there is no reason to even discuss Kaine. he was not selected as VP. there's no discussion to have, and the more you bring him up, the more you undercut any sort of argument for Palin.
He was considered by Obama. Team Obama had him go through the vetting process I believe. Thats more than enough to have him in this discussion.

But regardless of what Obama thought, what do you think about Tim Kaine's qualifications for President?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 04:57 PM   #296
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,489
Local Time: 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
I said before he started running for President.

what you seem to be missing is that Palin never ran for president. she was selected for the VP by McCain. the VP is traditionally a safe, seasoned politician who's #1 qualification must be their ability to take over the presidency. Clinton, Kennedy, Reagan, Obama -- all these were comparatively fresh faces, but voters are often willing to give the benefit of the experience doubt to a presidential candidate in exchange for a "vision" or other extraordinary political skills. the year + of campaigning acts as it's own vetting process.

what you also seem to be missing about the Palin pick is that this isn't really about Palin. she could prove to be totally competent. she could prove to be little more than snark in $380 rimless glasses.

the point is that McCain picked her for no other reason than that her personality and persona would help him with certain parts of the Republican base and that her newness would juice up his ticket.

there is no policy argument to be made for the selection of Palin.

this is about McCain and his judgment.






Quote:
He was considered by Obama. Team Obama had him go through the vetting process I believe. Thats more than enough to have him in this discussion.

this is why people have such a tough time with you. several people have answered this question, and you continue to ask it again and again.


Quote:
But regardless of what Obama thought, what do you think about Tim Kaine's qualifications for President?

if Tim Kaine feels he's qualified to be president, great. he can run. we can then see if he is or if he isn't. Obama clearly thought he wasn't qualified to be his VP, despite various skills and advantages that Kaine would clearly have brought to the ticket.

so you see, STING, Obama made the rational, thoughtful, and fully professional choice to go with Biden despite the fact that Kaine was a fresh face and Kaine would be instrumental in possibly winning VA. but guess what? Obama didn't do that. he went with someone who has much more obvious, defined, recorded, and defended experience on the issues.

now, comparing the decision making of McCain and Obama, just who do you want dealing with Putin or managing the economy? a man who thinks and acts cautiously, or a man who double-downs on a high risk candidate?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 06:47 PM   #297
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 02:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
what you seem to be missing is that Palin never ran for president. she was selected for the VP by McCain. the VP is traditionally a safe, seasoned politician who's #1 qualification must be their ability to take over the presidency. Clinton, Kennedy, Reagan, Obama -- all these were comparatively fresh faces, but voters are often willing to give the benefit of the experience doubt to a presidential candidate in exchange for a "vision" or other extraordinary political skills. the year + of campaigning acts as it's own vetting process.
Exactly. Were this election being held in 2010 instead of 2008, and were Sarah Palin to announce her intention next year to seek the Republican nomination for President, my response would be "OK, so the first-term governor from Alaska thinks she has the vision and skills to be President--let's hear her pitch." I'd still be skeptical at her lack of prior experience in national-level political organizations, but if she's willing to go through the long haul of proving herself to voters nationwide on the primary campaign trail, that would nonetheless change the game considerably in my view (as would her having completed multiple terms as governor, like Clinton did). But that's not what happened--instead, she was picked for VP just two months before the general election with no prior evidence of national-level aspirations, and only a year-and-a-half in the governor's office at the time of being picked. In what's traditionally seen as the first 'presidential' act of a party's presumptive nominee for president--his choice for VP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
So what Foreign Policy issues did Governor Clinton formulate policy stances on as chair of the Democratic Leadership Council?
I have no idea; I was just a teenager at the time, and because Bill Clinton actually ran for President, I got to know his domestic and foreign policy positions through that means. But you don't become chairman of the DLC without having a substantially developed political ideology on both domestic and foreign issues; that's just common sense. And much more to the point--at least, the one I was making--it demonstrates to your party that you have ambitious aspirations to national office, that you're keenly interested in having a voice in shaping your party's agenda at the national level. There are multiple ways to show that of course, but I can't think of any that Gov. Palin has shown. Nothing wrong with that--so long as you're aiming only to be a good first-term governor of Alaska.

So far as I know, Tim Kaine's participation in national-level politics is limited to serving on the executive committee of the National Governors Association. I assume his relative lack of experience helping shape the Democratic Party's domestic and foreign policy agenda, combined with his short time in the governor's office thus far, were major factors in Obama's decision not to pick him for VP candidate.


__________________________________

I would not expect any of this to matter much to registered Republicans who are strong ideological conservatives and consistently vote Republican. Realistically, if you vote primarily on ideology, you're probably going to be OK with almost anyone your party's nominee picks, so long as s/he doesn't seem A) all-around hopelessly incompetent, B) all-around loathesomely corrupt, or C) a slap in the face to the party's ideological base. (I don't consider Palin any of those things.) I'd expect it to matter to many independents, though, just as I'd expect Obama's short time in Washington (three-and-a-half years) to matter to them. The selection of Palin underlines McCain's beholdenness to the right wing of his party, not his 'maverick' bipartisan/centrist impulses.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 06:53 PM   #298
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 09:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
So if Clinton had not gone to Georgetown in the 1960s, and instead went to the University of Arkansas and got a degree in communications he would not have been qualified to be President in 1992?

Obama strongly considered Kaine. Kaine was in his top 3 picks, so the fact that he ended up going with Biden is irrelevant considering what were discussing.

I've never stated that Obama is not qualified to be President. But given the scrutiny of Palin, I'm curious as to when others think Obama became Qualified to be President.

Do you think Obama was qualified or "prepared" to be President in January 2007? November 2004? Sometime earlier than November 2004?
I think you're missing the point on multiple fronts. First, with regard to Kaine: It truly doesn't matter whether or not he is prepared to be President. Yes, he was vetted thoroughly and was one of the top picks for a long time because he had many other appealing attributes about him. But the fact of the matter is this: Barack Obama himself decided that he was not prepared to be POTUS. No one here is saying that he was prepared. Obama is not saying Kaine was prepared. Why are you asking us to come up with a reason to say he was? The difference between Kaine and Palin is this: While neither has the full package of preparedness, Obama deemed Kaine inappropriate, while McCain somehow decided Palin was ready. People can sit here and point out why Kaine wasn't ready, but there's no need to argue that he was because he's simply not being put up to the task. Palin, on the other hand, has been thrust into the position. It makes so much sense to ask if she is ready. Wondering if Kaine would be ready is like writing a thesis paper on whether Germany would've won WWII if they hadn't marched through Russia-----it's a totally pointless debate.

The other point you're missing is that there is no magic, single experience, no one credential that makes one ready to be POTUS. This is why people who argue that McCain's having been in the military is a free pass to the White House are missing something IMO. I'm not arguing that having been in the SFS is the thing that made Clinton ready. Rather, it's part of a full package.

Do I think that having had a somewhat rocky tenure as mayor of a town of 5,000 people for a half dozen years makes one ready to be POTUS? No. Do I think that having a 1 1/2 year tenure as governor of one of the country's least populated, most remote states makes one ready? No. Do I think that those two things combined make one ready? Not at all.

Here's a list of just a few things that Obama has in his corner off the top of my head...but note, not a single one of which in an of itself makes him ready: A successful political career in one of the nation's toughest state governments. A position of central, national importance as Senator, dealing with a wealth of national issues. The ability to lead people and have them enthusiastically follow him, as evidenced from post-college through to today. Positions on important congressional committees, making decisions that only a handful in the country get to make. The writing and passing of a handful of fairly important bills---more important than what many freshman senators get to make in their first term. A vision that combines answers to many of America's dilemmas into single solutions (for instance, his plans on making alternative energy a huge, important American industry attacks the problems of the economy, energy dependence, and the environment in one swoop), fighting the heart of America's problems and nurtures the heart of America itself (I view his emphasis on service and, again, the alternative energy industry plans as no less crucial to the economy and infrastructure of today than the Tennessee Valley Authority and the CCC were in the Great Depression). If you'll grant me the "fluff" of personal stuff, since that's what we're allowing Palin to use...She went to the PTA when her first kid was in elementary school, but not since. Obama went to PTA meetings through the first part of the primaries. You want a personal story attached to the President? This guy is the friggin' American Story, pulling himself from a societal limbo up to Harvard Law, the Senate, and a history-making run for President of the United States.

Those were just a few. Now to the campaign. You may say that the campaign shouldn't be counted. Was he ready before the campaign? Maybe not. Hell, I was a Biden guy at the start of the race. But to not take the weight of the campaign seriously would be the greatest folly. During the last year and a half, Obama's run one of the most impressive campaigns in history. He and his camp took down the Clinton Machine--what should've been the most formidable political machine in modern politics. His message has inspired record turnouts in voters on all sides (Clinton wouldn't have garnered so many votes if it were only Clinton vs. Edwards). He won the support, confidence, and services of the brightest political and economic minds--even capturing many ex-Clintonites. Fiscally, the campaign has been a behemoth, garnering more money than any campaign in history--much of it from large numbers of people donating small amounts. Of the final three (Obama, Clinton, McCain), Obama's is the only one that didn't achieve or near bankruptcy--a fact that I believe should be exploited in the election in a year when the economy is such a major issue. The man can run a nationwide monster of a machine. Add to that the "fluff" of inspiring Americans in a way that many haven't felt ever, inspiring the country and people around the world to believe in an America that the world has not seen for half a century--not just with elegant words, but with ideas that capture the hearts and minds of many.

That's just off the top of my head.

Do I think that there is one single thing in there that defined Obama's readiness to be President of the United States? No. It's the whole package. And that package is a hell of a lot more impressive than a few years as mayor of a 5,000-person town and a year and a half as governor of Alaska.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 06:54 PM   #299
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,419
Local Time: 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by namkcuR View Post
Obama will likely get New Hampshire. Virginia is a more of a question mark at this point.
i fully expect virginia to turn for mccain based on the state's prior voting record.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 09-08-2008, 06:58 PM   #300
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,419
Local Time: 08:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Within a week, I expect

NH and Colorado to be trending for McCain /Palin
so do i... which again will likely mean that the election comes down to

__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
 

Tags
mccain, obama, politics

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com