US 08 Presidential Campaign General Discussion Thread #7

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Would have to back up Strongbow.

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

That doesn't address BonoVox or UDM wanting actual proof of this, and it shifts the goal posts from anyone predicting an Obama landslide to merely anyone basically predicting his victory.
 
Okay, who are these multiple posters? I have asked this question before and even STING himself said he was only referring to Irvine.

So let's back it up boys.
 
You keep saying this, and you've been called out every time. It simply isn't true.

Really?

from GirlsAloudFan:

But allow me to let you FYMrs in on a little secret...

McCain doesn't have a chance in hell of winning this election!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHA

It's funny because it's true

doesn't have a chance in hell of winning this election

I guess what they really mean is that its going to be a close election.:wink:
 
He said that like yesterday - you were making these claims weeks ago, remember.

GAF is hardly a poster in FYM in any case. Talk about a drive-by post. So this is all?
 
He said that like yesterday - you were making these claims weeks ago, remember.

GAF is hardly a poster in FYM in any case. Talk about a drive-by post. So this is all?

Except you said above that I only claimed there was one person weeks ago, which is it?:wink:

Go back to the last page and actually read it. All I said was that there actually has been more than one person refering to the election as being a landslide.
 
Financeguy is referring to several posters so I suppose I should accept that for him 2 = several as well.
 
Financeguy is referring to several posters so I suppose I should accept that for him 2 = several as well.

What started this little debate was my post saying that there has been more than one person, Financeguy simply agreed.
 
Guys, be careful...

If I was allowed to make generalizations based on drive-by's... well let's just say it wouldn't be pretty.

Come on guys, why is it so hard for you to produce real evidence?
 
you can add me to two lists

first,
the one that includes posters that have written things that have implied that I expected the Dems to clean up in Nov and I have even inferred that Obama should win handily


the other one
is the list that includes posters in here that believe there are several posters in here that have written things that imply that they expect an easy win for Obama,

of course as the polls have tighten up, people have been revising their opinions,
I am on that list, too :wink:
 
AP August 21

Social conservatives are growing more wary of church involvement in politics, joining moderates and liberals in their unease about blurring the lines between pulpit and ballot box, a new study found.

Fifty percent of conservatives think churches and other places of worship should stay out of social and political matters, up from 30 percent four years ago, according to a survey released Thursday by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press.

That significant shift in conservative thought has brought the country to a tipping point on the question: a slim majority of Americans _ 52 percent _ now think churches should keep out of politics.

That's an eight percentage point increase over 2004 and the first time a majority of Americans has held that opinion since Pew officials started asking the question 12 years ago.

On this question, the gap between conservatives and liberals is narrowing: just four years ago, liberals were twice as likely as conservatives to say churches should stay out of politics. Now, 50 percent of conservatives and 57 percent of liberals think that. Four years ago, 62 percent of liberals opposed church involvement in politics. Democrats and Republicans are about even on the question, as well.

The survey also found largely unchanged attitudes along religious lines on the presidential choices compared with 2004, despite Democrat Barack Obama's strong play for religious voters and Republican John McCain's hesitancy to talk about his own faith and problems connecting with his party's evangelical base.

McCain leads Obama 68 percent to 24 percent among white evangelical Protestants, comparable to what President Bush was polling four years ago. But the support is tepid: just 28 percent of white evangelicals call themselves "strong" supporters of McCain, well short of Bush's 57 percent in 2004.

Changing attitudes about mixing church and politics could emerge as a factor in the fall campaign _ particularly for McCain. Both campaigns are plotting get-out-the-vote efforts in faith communities, but past Republican successes came when attitudes were more welcoming.

The attitude shift cut across conservative constituencies: 46 percent of Republican Protestants want churches out of politics, up from 28 percent in 2004. Thirty-six percent of white evangelical Republicans hold that view, up from 20 percent four years ago.

The question asked specifically about places of worship, which by law cannot take stands for or against candidates or political parties but may speak out on issues. So the public might hold different views about political stances taken by religious leaders speaking as individuals or religious advocacy groups.

The findings come after midterm elections in 2006 that saw Democrats seize control of Congress, a landmark court ruling this year legalizing gay marriage in California, and also amid an identity crisis among conservative evangelicals about which issues should take priority and who speaks for the movement.

Among the groups that shifted strongly away from wanting to see churches involved in politics: Americans who are less educated, those who believe gay marriage is a very important issue and those who think the two major parties are unfriendly to religion.

"To my mind, that spells frustration," said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center. "But by the same token, we know these very same people are not interested in less religiosity in the political discourse. They almost universally want a religious person as president.

"It's not that they want to take religion out of politics, it's that their frustrations with the way things seem to be going are leading them to say, 'Well, maybe churches should back off on this.'"

The survey confirmed that white non-Hispanic Catholics, who make up about 18 percent of the electorate, are shaping up to be a big swing vote this fall: 45 percent support McCain, while 44 percent back Obama. Democrat John Kerry, a Catholic, was doing better at this juncture in 2004, winning 50 percent of those Catholics.

Asked which candidate "shares my values," 47 percent of all respondents replied Obama and 39 percent said McCain. White evangelicals favor McCain on that question, the religiously nonaffiliated leaned Obama, while white non-Hispanic Catholics and mainline Protestants were split.

Democrats have made inroads in closing the so-called God gap, at least by one measure: 38 percent of respondents said the party is "friendly toward religion," up from 26 percent two years ago. Even so, considerably more people _ 52 percent _ viewed the Republican Party as religion-friendly.
 
Is John McCain's campaign going to bring up "prisoner of war" every time he is criticized for anything?

Yes.

This is just like Giuliani's 9/11.

POW! POW! POW!

How DARE you question his judgment, his honesty, his credibility? A POW! Shame on you.
 
Okay, who are these multiple posters? I have asked this question before and even STING himself said he was only referring to Irvine.


and i've said, repeatedly, that there *could* be an Obama tsunami because he's poised to win all the Kerry states, has been ahead in OH, and looks as if he could win CO, NM, VA and maybe NV. he's also competitive in NC, MT, and even maybe AK.

this would be an electoral tsunami even if the overall popular vote is closer.

:shrug:

it *could* happen. Obama has many, many more ways to the White House than McCain who doesn't look likely to flip any Kerry states.

but, gosh, if we're going to pretend that speculative, qualified posts that are rooted in real electoral analysis are evidence of some kind of hysteria in here ... well then i guess you can point me in the latest bru-ha-ha somewhere in central Asia and call me John McCain, a Prisoner of War, and i'll tell how you this particular crisis is the defining existential crisis of our time!!!



and i like it when some of us try to get cute and impish.
 
Yes.

This is just like Giuliani's 9/11.

POW! POW! POW!

How DARE you question his judgment, his honesty, his credibility? A POW! Shame on you.



and the irony is that loser Giuliani did his best to exploit the death of 3,000 innocent people he was supposed to protect and could barely limp to a fifth place finish in a field that had only one real adult in it (POW McCain).

loser.

oh, did i mention he's the Convention's keynote speaker? get ready, kids, it will be 2004 all over again! it will be a speech like we saw on 9-11 where we'll be warned that we'll be attacked again like we were on 9-11 and if we don't vote Republican, we'll die like we did on 9-11.
 
Get_Out_of_Gaffe_Free_sm.jpg
 
I think Giuliani should do the speech in drag, and the Project Runway contestants should design the outfit



that was a fun episode, no?

i'm rooting for Terri. she's my girl. and what she said about suede the other week was the single best quote that's ever come out of the mouth on any reality show, ever.
 

Are the Democrats going to pass those out at their convention like some of the delegates at the 2004 GOP convention passed out those lovely purple band-aids? That would be in poor taste, right?

"With three Purple Hearts, he never bled that I know of. And they're all superficial wounds." Bob Dole on John Kerry, 04
 
that was a fun episode, no?

i'm rooting for Terri. she's my girl. and what she said about suede the other week was the single best quote that's ever come out of the mouth on any reality show, ever.

It was awesome. I don't remember the Terri quote, but my favorite was Tim Gunn "it looks like a pterodactyl in a gay Jurassic Park"

I'm going to marry Tim Gunn, after I divorce Bruce and Anderson Cooper :D
 
TIME Magazine is calling McCain out now:

The McCain campaign's constant invocation of the candidate's POW past is weird bordering on irrational: yesterday, Nicolle Wallace used it as evidence that McCain didn't "cheat" at Saddleback. By a VERY generous interpretation, she could have meant that POWs don't cheat. Or that once you've been a POW, you've been through so much you're above cheating. Or maybe you can't accuse a POW of cheating unless you're a POW.

Today, spokesman Brian Rogers took the same tack against the "housing crisis" they currently face: "This is a guy who lived in one house for five and a half years -- in prison." So is he arguing that we shouldn't begrudge McCain his multiple house because he once lived in an awful prison? Is he saying POWs deserve multiple houses (and you thought Obama was pro-nanny-state!)? Or maybe he's saying that McCain's several houses are really just prisons... of the soul. Man is entombed by his possessions, it's true.

It's a head-spinning non sequitur, designed to distract us from something mildly troubling with the assertion of something impressive.

And then stuff like this, you can't even pen if you tried:

McCain, who huddled with advisors at his desert compound in Sedona, Ariz., said nothing in public. A nine-car motorcade took him to a nearby Starbucks early in the morning, where he ordered a large cappuccino. McCain otherwise avoided reporters.

Via LA Times. But Obama eats arugula so he's elitist. What a joke this election season has become!
 
Obama lying?

----

There’s one Democrat who would seem to have little or no chance of being picked by Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) to be his running mate – his former opponent, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.).

But it’s not for the reason you think.

Obama has often said, most recently on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on July 27, that Clinton “would be on anybody’s short list.”

But apparently not his.

“She was never vetted,” a Democratic official reported. “She was not asked for a single piece of paper.
She and Senator Obama have never had a single conversation about it. How would he know if she’d take it?”


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12713.html
 
Hillary Clinton, the completely unknown entity that she and her unfamous husband are, needs to be vetted?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom