US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #8 - Page 62 - 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 09-17-2008, 08:28 PM   #916
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yolland View Post
As far as the ad goes, yes, tying McCain's immigration record with Limbaugh's statements is definitely deceitful.
You know, I was just thinking that how the McCain campaign responds to this ad could be quite revealing. Will he dare to disassociate himself from Limbaugh?
__________________

__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 09-17-2008, 08:52 PM   #917
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2861U2 View Post
I bet his team was behind Palin's personal emails being hacked, too.


First and foremost, there is absolutely zero to be gained from this by the Obama campaign. A highly offensive personal attack that really reveals nothing of any substance other than some cute personal photos of her family no doubt gains her nothing but truckloads of sympathy. Think about it. It’s not like there are hot steamy emails there revealing a three-way affair between her, Cindy McCain and Mike Huckabee. There’s no evidence of her stupidity (and no need to go looking for it) or anything criminal. There’s nothing remotely embarrassing in it for her. It makes the hackers look (rightly) terrible, directs sympathy towards her, and absolutely nothing gained in return. To think it would have been backed by the Obama campaign or under their instructions is absolutely ridiculous. They would be seriously pissed that something like this has happened, it’s nothing but a free kick for her.

Plus, it happens all the time now - people like Lindsay Lohan getting their private email/phone/myspace/photos hacked and splashed all over these kind of sites all the time. That Palin uses a private Yahoo account has been fairly well documented in the news as well recently, has it not? I think you can safely put it down to the same sort of people after the same sort of results. Nothing more.
__________________

__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 09-17-2008, 09:08 PM   #918
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 08:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2861U2 View Post
Score a negative, lying, deceitful ad for Obama:

Political Punch
If only Senator McCain had done as Obama had asked and not been a complete douchebag, the tone of this campaign would be very different. This is a "tough race."


Quote:
I bet his team was behind Palin's personal emails being hacked, too. For all those people in this forum who, somehow, have yet to believe that Obama has crossed the line, please defend this, both the ad and the emails.
Actually, I wouldn't put it past McCain's team to have done it themselves to continue their lame portrayal of Palin as a victim of unfair and cruel opponents.
__________________
Utoo is offline  
Old 09-17-2008, 09:23 PM   #919
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Hopefully, the tide is turning back in Obama's direction...what was it Clinton said....'It's the economy, stupid'.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 09-17-2008, 09:33 PM   #920
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post

Actually, I wouldn't put it past McCain's team to have done it themselves to continue their lame portrayal of Palin as a victim of unfair and cruel opponents.
The group "Anonymous," the same group that went after Scientology earlier this year, have admitted in a press release to hacking her e-mail account. They must be in cahoots with the Obama campaign. That's my guess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Hopefully, the tide is turning back in Obama's direction
I've read in several places today that it is. The novelty is wearing off of Palin, and she's losing her sheen due to her lack of understanding of crucial issues, and McCain's getting slammed for saying that "the economy is fundamentally strong."
__________________
VintagePunk is online now  
Old 09-17-2008, 10:22 PM   #921
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Democrats Face Historic Voter Hurdle

Analysis By Scott Rasmussen

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

Much has been made this year about how the fundamentals favor the Democrats. An unpopular Republican president, a war that has dragged on beyond the limits of public tolerance, a declining number of people identifying as Republicans and a worrisome economy all set the stage for the Democrats to reclaim the White House.

While citing these factors, Rasmussen Reports and many others have not often pointed out another fundamental—the difficulty Democrats have in attracting a majority of the popular vote.

Since 1860, the year that Abraham Lincoln became the first Republican president, only three Democrats have won the White House with a majority of the popular vote. Each of the three—Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon Johnson, and Jimmy Carter—were aided by extraordinary circumstances.

Roosevelt was elected during the depths of the Great Depression. Johnson was elected less than a year after he assumed the presidency following the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Carter was elected in the immediate aftermath of Watergate, a time that makes even the current challenges faced by the Republican Party seem tame by comparison.

For a while, it appeared to many that Barack Obama might be able to expand the traditional limits of Democratic appeal and break through the 50% ceiling. But despite all the polling done by Rasmussen Reports and others this season, he has not yet broken through that barrier.

Still, for much of the year, it seemed like a Democrat winning 49% or 50% of the vote should be able to capture the White House. After all, the GOP was fragmented and less than thrilled with their nominee. So, if a Ron Paul or a Bob Barr picked up two or three percent of the vote, many expected that McCain would be doomed.

Now, with the addition of Alaska's conservative governor, Sarah Palin, to the ticket, McCain has succeeded in uniting his party and ramping up its enthusiasm. In fact, it now seems that Hillary Clinton, an unsuccessful contender for the Democratic presidential nomination, might drain a point or so of support from Obama. That appears to be as likely as Libertarian Party candidate Barr grabbing a few votes from McCain.

If the Democrats have an historic ceiling around 50% and the GOP is united, those fundamentals suggest a toss-up, and that’s what we have in the country today. The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll shows McCain and Obama in a very competitive race heading into the debate phase of the campaign.

Rasmussen Reports: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

There have only been a total of 6 Democratic Presidents to ever be elected President while winning 50% or more of the popular vote, in US history. They are:

Andrew Jackson
Martin Van Buren
Franklin Pierce
Franklin Roosevelt
Lyndon Johnson
Jimmy Carter


In 2004, George Bush was re-elected President of the United States winning 50.73% of the popular vote. There are only two Democratic Presidents that have ever been re-elected President winning 50% or more of the popular vote, Andrew Jackson and Franklin Roosevelt.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-17-2008, 11:01 PM   #922
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strongbow View Post
Rasmussen Reports: The most comprehensive public opinion coverage ever provided for a presidential election.

There have only been a total of 6 Democratic Presidents to ever be elected President while winning 50% or more of the popular vote, in US history. They are:

Andrew Jackson
Martin Van Buren
Franklin Pierce
Franklin Roosevelt
Lyndon Johnson
Jimmy Carter


In 2004, George Bush was re-elected President of the United States winning 50.73% of the popular vote. There are only two Democratic Presidents that have ever been re-elected President winning 50% or more of the popular vote, Andrew Jackson and Franklin Roosevelt.

Those stats don't say anything about the 2008. Anything before the 1964 is really pointless. If we could get African Americans and women to not be able to vote,
the GOP would get over 50%.



If you want to include everybody
then we should at least start with the Civil Rights act in 1964.

LBJ got 61 %

Has any Republican ever got 61% ?
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 12:08 AM   #923
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 12:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by deep View Post
Those stats don't say anything about the 2008. Anything before the 1964 is really pointless. If we could get African Americans and women to not be able to vote,
the GOP would get over 50%.



If you want to include everybody
then we should at least start with the Civil Rights act in 1964.

LBJ got 61 %

Has any Republican ever got 61% ?
Fine, lets just do 1964 and up. Makes the Republicans and what George Bush did in 2004 look even better.

There have only been 3 Democratic Presidents elected to office since 1964. Only one was re-elected President. In only 2 of the 4 elections that they won, were they able to get 50% or more of the popular vote. With the exception of 1968 and 2000, every Republican elected to President since 1964 has received 50% or more of the popular vote.

There has not been a single Democrat since 1964 to be re-elected with 50% or more of the vote like George Bush was in 2004.


LBJ has the largest popular vote percentage total in history at 61%. Nixon in 1972 was close though with 60.67%.

The greatest Electoral Landslide in history was Ronald Reagan's 1984 victory where he won 58% of the popular vote and won every state in the Union except Minnesota. He only lost that state by 3,000 votes.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 12:49 AM   #924
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Yes but is we are merely stating facts here

It is a irrefutable fact that more Americans voted for John Kerry for President
than the number of Americans that voted for Ronald Reagan in 1984.

So, Reagan's 1984 landslide falls behind both Al Gore and John Kerry in number of votes.


More American went to the polls for Al Gore or John Kerry than for Reagan in a single election.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 01:08 AM   #925
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 01:57 AM
Which brings you full circle back to the historical fact that still has the rest of the world outside the United States absolutely gobsmacked:

More people voted for George Bush in the 2004 election than for any other candidate in history.

We’re still all waiting for you to explain that one.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 01:11 AM   #926
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Lila64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: ♥Set List Lane♥
Posts: 52,710
Local Time: 05:57 PM
I was not one of them

__________________
Lila64 is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 01:25 AM   #927
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 07:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2861U2 View Post
Score a negative, lying, deceitful ad for Obama:

Political Punch

I bet his team was behind Palin's personal emails being hacked, too. For all those people in this forum who, somehow, have yet to believe that Obama has crossed the line, please defend this, both the ad and the emails.
The ad crosses the line. I find it disappointing, to say the least, but I can't say I'm terribly surprised. Remember, it's you that's been trying to paint those planning to vote for Obama as worshipers of He Who Can Do No Wrong. I know I've never made such claims.

There's a lot of people clamoring for Obama to "hit back hard" and if this is what they mean I hope he won't continue in that direction. It diminishes him (as it has diminished McCain) and it could prove harmful to him in a way that it isn't to McCain due to the "angry black man" thing that Irvine astutly pointed out.

I don't need to defend the e-mails because I don't think Obama's team was involved in that.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 01:27 AM   #928
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 07:57 PM
My name is Buster Taint Palin
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 01:35 AM   #929
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earnie Shavers View Post
Which brings you full circle back to the historical fact that still has the rest of the world outside the United States absolutely gobsmacked:

More people voted for George Bush in the 2004 election than for any other candidate in history.

We’re still all waiting for you to explain that one.


W is actually one of the least popular U S Presidents ever.




The fact that more people voted for him than for any other candidate in history.
Is saying nothing more than the fact that in 2004 the country had a population or 300 million and there really was not a viable 3rd party candidate.

In 1964 when L B J got one of the highest percentages - 61.1%
the population was 192 million.


Each of Bill Clinton's elections had a viable 3rd candidate in Ross Perot.

Bill Clinton beat the GOP candidate by 9 %.

George Bush II only beat Kerry by 3 %.

1992 election results

Clinton 43 %
Bush 37.4 %
Perot 18.9 %

1996

Clinton 49.2 %
Dole 40.7 %
Perot 8.4 %
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 09-18-2008, 01:40 AM   #930
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 01:57 AM
He still should have been rolled by a record %.
__________________

__________________
Earnie Shavers 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 07:57 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