US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #8 - Page 21 - 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, 07:15 PM   #301
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2democrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: England by way of 'Murica.
Posts: 22,140
Local Time: 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
i fully expect virginia to turn for mccain based on the state's prior voting record.
Virginia has changed a lot over the last 4 years alone, an influx of out of state people moving in for various reasons, businesses, federal govt workers, etc. The electorate of Virginia simply isn't the same that it has/had been over the last, well, 200 years.
__________________

__________________
U2democrat is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 07:15 PM   #302
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
so do i... which again will likely mean that the election comes down to

McCain's chances in Ohio are improving. too.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 07:21 PM   #303
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,700
Local Time: 04:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
So basically, either way it's up to the national committee of the party in question to appoint a replacement. They wouldn't have to 'promote' the VP candidate to Presidential candidate if they didn't want to.
Good to know. Thanks very much, yolland!
__________________
corianderstem is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 07:46 PM   #304
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Lila64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,710
Local Time: 05:30 PM
Nice post Utoo (too long to quote )
__________________
Lila64 is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 08:34 PM   #305
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:30 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.

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 question was, what clearly demonstrates Bill Clintons interest in Foreign Policy prior to him running for President in 1991? Thats the standard you set for Palin, so whats your answer for Clinton, Kaine?

Try just answering the question this time.

Quote:
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.
Oh and that the fact that she is qualified to be President especially based on the standards you have set for the top of your ticket and those you have supported for President in the past.


Quote:
there is no policy argument to be made for the selection of Palin.
Whats the policy argument for Tim Kaine?

Quote:
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.
Sorry, but saying Tim Kaine was not picked is not an answer to the question.

Quote:
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.
I asked YOU, if you thought Time Kaine was qualified to be president. What do you think?

Quote:
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.
Did the Obama campaign team state that Tim Kaine was not picked to be VP because they found that he was not qualified? Is that why they didn't pick Senator Evan Bahy of Indiana, because he was not qualified?


Quote:
now, comparing the decision making of McCain and Obama, just who do you want dealing with Putin or managing the economy?
Well, I certainly don't want someone who believes Kuwait would be safer today with Saddam in power in Iraq. I certainly don't want someone who thinks Georgia is equally responsible as Russia for what happened in Georgia in August 2008 and does not recognize the danger that Russia can still pose to its neighbors and the rest of Europe. I definitely don't want someone who wants to put unwarrented restrictions on Free Trade. I also don't want someone who is going to raid the defense budget and slow down military modernization in order to pay for his pet domestic programs.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 08:43 PM   #306
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
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.
Well, if thats the case you or someone else should be able to name foreign policy issues that he held prior to running for President. Lets hear some of them.

Quote:
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.
Is that also why they did not select Evan Bayh? The logic many here are using is that simply because Obama did not pick Tim Kaine, it means they did not think he was qualified to be President.


Quote:
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.)
Republicans but not Democrats?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 08:48 PM   #307
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2Fanatic4ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: nowhere..........man
Posts: 20,254
Local Time: 08:30 PM
well said post Steve!
__________________
U2Fanatic4ever is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 08:53 PM   #308
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
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.
Well then based on that logic, I guess we should assume the reason Obama did not pick Evan Bahy was because he was not qualified either, right?

Your only evidence for claiming that Obama did not think Tim Kaine was qualified is the fact that he was not picked. Well, you could use that same evidence to say the same thing about Evan Bahy and the rest of the Democratic party. After all, they were not picked.

Quote:
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.
Do you think serving as a state representitive from a county with only 3,000 people for half a dozen years makes one ready to be POTUS? Do you think serving one term in the US House of Representitives, representing a district with only 20,000 people makes one ready to be POTUS?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 09:07 PM   #309
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 08:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Do you think serving as a state representitive from a county with only 3,000 people for half a dozen years makes one ready to be POTUS? Do you think serving one term in the US House of Representitives, representing a district with only 20,000 people makes one ready to be POTUS?

One requirement for being POTUS is understanding what you read.

I believe the theme of my post was that there is no one, be-all end-all thing that makes a person ready to be POTUS.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 09:10 PM   #310
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
One requirement for being POTUS is understanding what you read.

I believe the theme of my post was that there is no one, be-all end-all thing that makes a person ready to be POTUS.
This is what I was responding to:

Quote:
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.
Your words not mine.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 09:27 PM   #311
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,471
Local Time: 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
One requirement for being POTUS is understanding what you read.

I believe the theme of my post was that there is no one, be-all end-all thing that makes a person ready to be POTUS.


i wish you luck with this. i just don't have the energy.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 09:33 PM   #312
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Do you think serving as a state representitive from a county with only 3,000 people for half a dozen years makes one ready to be POTUS? Do you think serving one term in the US House of Representitives, representing a district with only 20,000 people makes one ready to be POTUS?
Who on either ticket has this background?
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 09:57 PM   #313
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 01:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Well, if thats the case you or someone else should be able to name foreign policy issues that he held prior to running for President.
As I said earlier,
Quote:
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. Those are the kinds of things state-level executives with aspirations to move onto the national stage do--especially when they're single-termers (or less) from 'unimportant' states and thus lacking in name recognition and connections compared to, say, multi-term governors of CA or TX.
Quote:
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.
Which precise stances Clinton articulated on foreign AND national-domestic issues (I never suggested only foreign policy was relevant) while with the DLC don't matter, and I never claimed to know them; it's just the nature of the organization to develop and promote neoliberal, 'New Democrat' agendas through its membership, which consists mostly of current and former elected officials (national and state level). It simply isn't possible to become DLC chair without extensive involvement in that process. It was two decades ago when Bill Clinton did that--I have no idea which of its initiatives might have been 'pet projects' of his, nor do I see any point in taking the time to research them. Which national political organizations has Palin held leadership positions in? What did she do prior to being nominated to demonstrate an ambition to influence Republican domestic and foreign policy at the national level? And in the absence of either of those things, what does her record of public statements on federal matters show about her domestic and foreign policy acumen?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Is that also why they did not select Evan Bayh? The logic many here are using is that simply because Obama did not pick Tim Kaine, it means they did not think he was qualified to be President.
Bayh has several more years in office at both the national and state levels than Kaine does (or Obama, at least at the national level), but not as many as Biden. Again, I'd assume Biden was picked because he had the most experience in national office, an area in which many voters see Obama as lacking. Obama is better prepared for national office than Palin--he's held national office for three-and-a-half years already, for that matter--but he's obviously logged far fewer years in the Senate than McCain.

deep has made the point repeatedly that McCain, because of his many years in the Senate, had less of a strategic need than Obama to pick a VP candidate with many years of experience in public office. I agree with that, but Palin is an extreme--no national-level experience, only a year-and-a-half state-level experience, no prior indication of fast-track ambitions to a national career. Again, I see the Palin pick as indicative of McCain's beholdenness to the right wing of the GOP, not to his 'maverick' tendencies, which would be better suited to the likes of Lieberman or Ridge--candidates who would further alienate his party's right wing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Republicans but not Democrats?
You mean this part?
Quote:
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.
No, of course that applies to both parties.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 09-08-2008, 11:32 PM   #314
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by phillyfan26 View Post
Who on either ticket has this background?
No one, I was just asking if they thought that level of experience would, or would not qualify the person to be President.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-09-2008, 12:07 AM   #315
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
As I said earlier,


Which precise stances Clinton articulated on foreign AND national-domestic issues (I never suggested only foreign policy was relevant) while with the DLC don't matter, and I never claimed to know them; it's just the nature of the organization to develop and promote neoliberal, 'New Democrat' agendas through its membership, which consists mostly of current and former elected officials (national and state level). It simply isn't possible to become DLC chair without extensive involvement in that process. It was two decades ago when Bill Clinton did that--I have no idea which of its initiatives might have been 'pet projects' of his, nor do I see any point in taking the time to research them.
Even if you could find something, this is a razor thin arguement at best for suggesting that Bill Clinton was prepared to be President, but Sarah Palin is not. I noticed that he was chair for one year from 1990 to 1991, during the large scale military intervention by the United States in the Persian Gulf. But the media had trouble finding what Bill Clinton's views were on the 1991 Gulf War at the time it happened, and doubts that he might of been against it, or on the fence about it, is said to have impacted his decision in picking Al Gore to be his running mate, one of the few Democratic Senators to vote for the 1991 Gulf War. What were his responsibilities as the DLC chair in 1990-1991? Exactly how much time did he spend with it during that year?


Quote:
I agree with that, but Palin is an extreme--no national-level experience, only a year-and-a-half state-level experience, no prior indication of fast-track ambitions to a national career.
Well, how would you describe Tim Kaine? Its simply to far of a stretch to suggest that Kaine is qualified and Palin is not.

But hey, if the Democrats think thats their best shot of winning now, to go after Palin and her qualifications to be on the ticket, I say go for it. I'm sure independent women everywhere will love to hear such razor thin arguements that Governors Kaine and Clinton were qualified to be President, but Palin is not.

Quote:
No, of course that applies to both parties.
I just noticed you mentioned Republicans and not Republicans AND Democrats.
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline  
 

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 07:30 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