You guys better wake up. Whatever the Republicans have been doing lately, it's working. You can complain all you want, but that's not going to get anyone anywhere. That's why I've consistently said that Obama needs to retool. Something is not firing on all cylinders.
You guys better wake up. Whatever the Republicans have been doing lately, it's working.
And what exactly can we do about it? If what the Republicans are doing is working, then that just means people like me were disenfranchised a long, long time ago, and there's really no point in our participating in the first place.
Of course, I live in New York, so my vote never mattered in the first place. Only the most uninformed and least committed people in the few "swing states" have any real say in presidential elections.
But again, what should I do? No candidate who did what I truly believe is right would ever have a chance.
You guys better wake up. Whatever the Republicans have been doing lately, it's working. You can complain all you want, but that's not going to get anyone anywhere. That's why I've consistently said that Obama needs to retool. Something is not firing on all cylinders.
Oh I stopped caring about your opinions a long time ago.
“You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig,†Obama said during a town-hall style event here Tuesday night.
The comment was widely interpreted as a play on Republican vice-presidential candidate Palin’s joke during the Republican National Convention that the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom was lipstick, though the campaign said Obama wasn’t referencing Palin’s comments.
Obama has been hammering the Republican ticket for adopting his change mantra. “This is a guy who supported George Bush 90% of the time. What does that say about somebody’s judgment that they agree with George Bush 90% of the time?†he said.
“You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called ‘change,’ it’s still going to stink,†Obama said. “After eight years, we’ve had enough of the same old thing. It’s time to bring about real change to Washington and that’s the choice you’ve got in this election.â€Â
That is the complete second part of the quote. When you look at the entire quote it is an attack on McCain and Palin.
Palin has identified herself as a pitbull with lipstick. Obama criticized McCain's convention speech as an attempt to steal the change moniker from Obama and wrap himself up in it. If you look at it in the context of recent events it is 100% an attack on McCain/Palin. Obama has also been saying that McCain/Palin is just a third term for Bush.
If you can't see the attack here you are simply not aware of what is going on or in denial.
kilarney is right. Obama is 100% off his game and sounding more and more like a typical politician. Gone is the Obama who stands above the fray and does not lower himself to the politics of personal destruction and partisanship. Why is the Presidential candidate attacking the other side's VP pick? Shouldn't Biden be doing this? you know, Biden, the guy who told a guy in a wheelchair to stand up for the crowd and then said that he was "new" at this.
“You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig,†Obama said during a town-hall style event here Tuesday night.
The comment was widely interpreted as a play on Republican vice-presidential candidate Palin’s joke during the Republican National Convention that the only difference between a pit bull and a hockey mom was lipstick, though the campaign said Obama wasn’t referencing Palin’s comments.
Obama has been hammering the Republican ticket for adopting his change mantra. “This is a guy who supported George Bush 90% of the time. What does that say about somebody’s judgment that they agree with George Bush 90% of the time?†he said.
“You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called ‘change,’ it’s still going to stink,†Obama said. “After eight years, we’ve had enough of the same old thing. It’s time to bring about real change to Washington and that’s the choice you’ve got in this election.â€Â
That is the complete second part of the quote. When you look at the entire quote it is an attack on McCain and Palin.
Palin has identified herself as a pitbull with lipstick. Obama criticized McCain's convention speech as an attempt to steal the change moniker from Obama and wrap himself up in it. If you look at it in the context of recent events it is 100% an attack on McCain/Palin. Obama has also been saying that McCain/Palin is just a third term for Bush.
If you can't see the attack here you are simply not aware of what is going on or in denial.
kilarney is right. Obama is 100% off his game and sounding more and more like a typical politician. Gone is the Obama who stands above the fray and does not lower himself to the politics of personal destruction and partisanship. Why is the Presidential candidate attacking the other side's VP pick? Shouldn't Biden be doing this? you know, Biden, the guy who told a guy in a wheelchair to stand up for the crowd and then said that he was "new" at this.
GET FUCKING REAL STEVE, you complain about people using the Race card or the Sex card, here is a blatant case of the republicans attempting to use the SEX card. Listen to that quote, Palin is not mentioned at all, IT IS COMPLETELY CLEAR THAT HE IS REFERRING TO BUSH'S POLICIES AS THE PIG AND MCCAIN'S 'CHANGE' as the lipstick. Jesus H Christ.
OK... Is there some sort of conspiracy within the Democrat party to make sure Obama loses in November? Now even Biden is turning against him!
At a rally in Nashua, New Hampshire, a man in the audience told Biden how glad he was that Obama picked him over Hillary "not because she's a woman, but because look at the things she did in the past."
"Make no mistake about this," Biden responded. "Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be vice president of the United States of America. Let’s get that straight. She’s a truly close personal friend, she is qualified to be president of the United States of America, she’s easily qualified to be vice president of the United States of America and quite frankly it might have been a better pick than me. But she’s first rate, I mean that sincerely, she’s first rate, so let’s get that straight."
GET FUCKING REAL STEVE, you complain about people using the Race card or the Sex card, here is a blatant case of the republicans attempting to use the SEX card. Listen to that quote, Palin is not mentioned at all, IT IS COMPLETELY CLEAR THAT HE IS REFERRING TO BUSH'S POLICIES AS THE PIG AND MCCAIN'S 'CHANGE' as the lipstick. Jesus H Christ.
Who then is the "old fish" wrapping himself up in papers marked "change"?
The Old Fish is John McCain or his Policies, and the wrap is him trying to portray his vision as change. It's the same damn statement just said a different way.
The whole point of the statements is the contrast the message McCain has been trying to get out that he is actually Change, while in reality it would be the same thing we've been dealing with for the last 8 years.
Why then did Obama even use the lipstick/pig joke when Palin's lipstick/pitbull line is still on everyone's mind? This is why I am beginning to think there is some sort of conspiracy going on within the Democrat party to keep Obama from winning in November.
The bit with Biden has me wondering if they are planning to switch him out for Hillary as the VP. Even though Hillary would have been a better VP pick (and would have destroyed any benefit from McCain picking Palin) switching out now would just reinforce the idea that when Obama made his first big presidential decision he blew it and picked the wrong guy. If he somehow dumps Biden and gets Hillary McCain will have a field day with it and many will see it as Obama jumping on the female VP bandwagon (at best).
PS: Did you think up that answer about the pig being the policies or did you get it from this article?
"Keep in mind, technically, had I meant it this way, [Palin] would be the lipstick. The failed policies of John McCain would be the pig, just following the logic of this illogical situation," Obama said.
Earlier in the day, Obama accused Republican McCain's campaign of using "lies and phony outrage and Swift-boat politics" in claiming he used a sexist comment against Palin.
Swiftboating? I can see him accusing the Republicans of twisting the truth (in this case) but swiftboating?
Even though Matthews really goes on a rant, he makes some good points. I find it really funny that the McCain guy says "you have to be very careful what you say in this campaign". Why? Because the McCain Campaign will try to spin every single word into their favor? Is that a warning or a threat?
And Steve is really a moron who seems to be drinking the McCain Kool-Aid
You guys better wake up. Whatever the Republicans have been doing lately, it's working. You can complain all you want, but that's not going to get anyone anywhere. That's why I've consistently said that Obama needs to retool. Something is not firing on all cylinders.
Oh I stopped caring about your opinions a long time ago.
Mr. Macross, let me make something very clear. Obama, versus McCain, has led in the polls since early April. As recently as June and July, he has led by a substantial margin. For the first time since April, McCain has taken the lead. These are facts. Not opinion.
Now... my opinion is that this should be cause for concern. My opinion is that Obama needs to reassess his strategy and attempt to take back his lead.
What part of my opinion do you disagree with? Do you not care about my opinion because you want McCain to win?
I have no idea who is going to win this election. It's so close, that nobody should be confident. If McCain does win, I can't wait to quote some of the comments here that illustrate such complete and utter denial of his viability.
This race is extremely close. Both candidates should be very concerned. Obama supporters should be energized right now. The Republicans are fired up. Instead of getting pissed off at this, fight fire with fire.
I have no idea who is going to win this election. It's so close, that nobody should be confident. If McCain does win, I can't wait to quote some of the comments here that illustrate such complete and utter denial of his viability.
I think the thing is that you, and maybe Steve, are the only people here who care about, or want to talk about, campaign "strategy". It's an incredibly transparent propaganda machine, and we don't really feel like discussing how best to manipulate it.
The only thing that really matters is what you want the government to do, and which candidates (not just for president, but all elected positions) will bring the government closest to your ideal, if elected. Then, on top of that, is the discussion if your ideal is actually realistic and/or good. Really, if talking about election politics, those are the only things that matter. Pretty much absolutely everything else is just bullshit that we want to do away with. You're doing nothing more than perpetuating the shit that makes our democracy fail.
If you want to talk about politics, at least have the balls to actually discuss the issues instead tabloid nonsense.
Actually I care a lot about campaign strategy because it can say a lot about the candidate involved. However if your strategy is going to be raise a ton of BS I'm not interested. It's a completely viable topic to discuss how a campaign needs to control it's message and get this out to the voters...
Actually I care a lot about campaign strategy because it can say a lot about the candidate involved.
Bingo. This is exactly what attracted me to Obama. If you paid attention, Scott, you'd see that he was the candidate that did away with all the the BS. Now that he's descended into BS hell, it's discouraging. So strategy does matter. I want elections free from BS - and I want Obama to return to that model. I don't care if you are a Republican or a Democrat. For a while, Obama really seemed to be changing the way that political races were run - and the change was for the better.
The only thing that really matters is what you want the government to do, and which candidates (not just for president, but all elected positions) will bring the government closest to your ideal, if elected.
Are you ignoring the if elected part? That's the key.
I don't find it to be a coincidence that his poll numbers have fallen as he's engaged in old-school political tactics. I'm advocating that he return to a model that you want. You're just throwing your hands up in the air while crossing your fingers. I'll be the first to admit that none of us have any control over this. That, however, doesn't mean that all discussion should cease. Life would be pretty boring if we only talked about things that we could directly influence. You'd never talk about Windows, your IPhone, the Wii, anime, etc.
Actually I care a lot about campaign strategy because it can say a lot about the candidate involved.
What can it tell you? This isn't a popularity contest. It isn't a personality contest. It isn't a beauty pageant. All that matters is the candidate's stance on the issues. If you make your decision based on anything other than that, you're doing it wrong. Give me the ugliest, meanest, candidate with no chance of winnign. If they agree with me on the issues more than the other candidates, they get my vote.
Bingo. This is exactly what attracted me to Obama. If you paid attention, Scott, you'd see that he was the candidate that did away with all the the BS.
So you weren't attracted to Obama because of his stances on issues, but because you were under the impression that he wasn't playing the media circus game? Hah! You really believe that? Give me a break. His propaganda machine has been in full gear for years. It was just more in harmony with your brainwaves until recently, so maybe you didn't notice it. Obama may play the game a little differently than McCain, but he is without a doubt sitting at the table and taking his turns. Give me a candidate that refuses to sit down, and maybe I'll be excited. I don't think such a candidate has existed since the republics of ancient Greece, when mass media did not exist, and maybe not even then.
All that matters is the candidate's stance on the issues.
Wrong. The President must work with leaders of other countries and with Congress. Looking at their campaign can tell you how well (or not well) they can work with others. The President's interpersonal skills are a very important element of the job. Right now, we need a President that will help to repair the damage that our image has suffered abroad.
So you weren't attracted to Obama because of his stances on issues, but because you were under the impression that he wasn't playing the media circus game?
Issues absolutely matter - but as I said above, they are not the only thing that matters. You can only effectuate the issues if you are good at playing the game.
Obama may play the game a little differently than McCain, but he is without a doubt sitting at the table and taking his turns.
Wrong. The President must work with leaders of other countries and with Congress. Looking at their campaign can tell you how well (or not well) they can work with others. The President's interpersonal skills are a very important element of the job. Right now, we need a President that will help to repair the damage that our image has suffered abroad.
People don't hate us because Bush is a jerk. They hate us because his policies are idiotic. To be perfectly honest, politics aside, the current President Bush seems like he's pretty chill, if dim. I imagine he gets along well with other world leaders, except they disagree on policy.
On the other hand, look at someone like Andrew Jackson. He was a total dickwad. His policies were bad too, but he got what he wanted, for the most part. A dickwad with good policy can make them happen very effectively. Personality really isn't that significant.
For a second, let's consider that personality is a factor. That's fine, but you have no way of judging personality. In your entire life you will never see a single truly genuine moment from any politician. Even if they are genuine, you have no way of knowing. You have to assume that all of these people are actors. They are acting 100% of the time cameras and/or microphones are pointed at them. If you believe Obama has a good personality because you saw him on TV, then you must believe that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a bad ass commando who has been to Mars. Because you have absolutely no reliable information as to whether a candidate has a good personality or not, any decision you make about personality, is completely arbitrary. So even if it matters, you can't make a decision based on it, because you don't have anything to base that decision on.
The best you can do is look at the prior voting record, their stated platform, and their campaign promises, and even then you have to have a lot of trust that they aren't just lying. Someone could easily always vote for the most popular decision, lie in their platform, lie in their promises, and just do whatever it takes to get ahead. Then when they reach the top, give everyone the finger, and do what they really wanted to do. The gaping hole in democracy is the lack of trust and reality between the voter and the candidate. We're effectively voting for fictional characters.
okay, I never watch fox news, but I was at a health clinic yesterday and fox news was on. In the 1 hour I was there they spent 50% of it (in different segments) talking about this lipstick comment. I hate american news networks. May they all (especially fox news) meet most unfortunate fortune cookie fortunes.
Actually I care a lot about campaign strategy because it can say a lot about the candidate involved.
What can it tell you? This isn't a popularity contest. It isn't a personality contest. It isn't a beauty pageant.
According to a recent NY times poll, 37% of registered voters do not consider the candidate's position on issues to be the primary item of consideration when voting. They look at leadership qualities and personality first and foremost. 48% look at the issues first. So, whether or not we want it to be that way, it's a popularity contest, and the issues don't matter as much as they should.
According to a recent NY times poll, 37% of registered voters do not consider the candidate's position on issues to be the primary item of consideration when voting. They look at leadership qualities and personality first and foremost. 48% look at the issues first. So, whether or not we want it to be that way, it's a popularity contest, and the issues don't matter as much as they should.
This is why I hate people.
This is why I don't give a shit, because it doesn't matter. Democracy, even a small one, doesn't work if people are stupid.
Comments
Of course, I live in New York, so my vote never mattered in the first place. Only the most uninformed and least committed people in the few "swing states" have any real say in presidential elections.
But again, what should I do? No candidate who did what I truly believe is right would ever have a chance.
McCain says the same thing in regards to Hillary's Health Care Plan. OMG he's calling Hillary a PIG!
Palin has identified herself as a pitbull with lipstick. Obama criticized McCain's convention speech as an attempt to steal the change moniker from Obama and wrap himself up in it. If you look at it in the context of recent events it is 100% an attack on McCain/Palin. Obama has also been saying that McCain/Palin is just a third term for Bush.
If you can't see the attack here you are simply not aware of what is going on or in denial.
Obama Puts Different Twist on Lipstick
kilarney is right. Obama is 100% off his game and sounding more and more like a typical politician. Gone is the Obama who stands above the fray and does not lower himself to the politics of personal destruction and partisanship. Why is the Presidential candidate attacking the other side's VP pick? Shouldn't Biden be doing this? you know, Biden, the guy who told a guy in a wheelchair to stand up for the crowd and then said that he was "new" at this.
GET FUCKING REAL STEVE, you complain about people using the Race card or the Sex card, here is a blatant case of the republicans attempting to use the SEX card. Listen to that quote, Palin is not mentioned at all, IT IS COMPLETELY CLEAR THAT HE IS REFERRING TO BUSH'S POLICIES AS THE PIG AND MCCAIN'S 'CHANGE' as the lipstick. Jesus H Christ.
WTF? His own VP pick is now saying that Obama has poor judgement!
The whole point of the statements is the contrast the message McCain has been trying to get out that he is actually Change, while in reality it would be the same thing we've been dealing with for the last 8 years.
The bit with Biden has me wondering if they are planning to switch him out for Hillary as the VP. Even though Hillary would have been a better VP pick (and would have destroyed any benefit from McCain picking Palin) switching out now would just reinforce the idea that when Obama made his first big presidential decision he blew it and picked the wrong guy. If he somehow dumps Biden and gets Hillary McCain will have a field day with it and many will see it as Obama jumping on the female VP bandwagon (at best).
PS: Did you think up that answer about the pig being the policies or did you get it from this article? Swiftboating? I can see him accusing the Republicans of twisting the truth (in this case) but swiftboating?
Even though Matthews really goes on a rant, he makes some good points. I find it really funny that the McCain guy says "you have to be very careful what you say in this campaign". Why? Because the McCain Campaign will try to spin every single word into their favor? Is that a warning or a threat?
And Steve is really a moron who seems to be drinking the McCain Kool-Aid
Now... my opinion is that this should be cause for concern. My opinion is that Obama needs to reassess his strategy and attempt to take back his lead.
What part of my opinion do you disagree with? Do you not care about my opinion because you want McCain to win?
I have no idea who is going to win this election. It's so close, that nobody should be confident. If McCain does win, I can't wait to quote some of the comments here that illustrate such complete and utter denial of his viability.
This race is extremely close. Both candidates should be very concerned. Obama supporters should be energized right now. The Republicans are fired up. Instead of getting pissed off at this, fight fire with fire.
The only thing that really matters is what you want the government to do, and which candidates (not just for president, but all elected positions) will bring the government closest to your ideal, if elected. Then, on top of that, is the discussion if your ideal is actually realistic and/or good. Really, if talking about election politics, those are the only things that matter. Pretty much absolutely everything else is just bullshit that we want to do away with. You're doing nothing more than perpetuating the shit that makes our democracy fail.
If you want to talk about politics, at least have the balls to actually discuss the issues instead tabloid nonsense.
I don't find it to be a coincidence that his poll numbers have fallen as he's engaged in old-school political tactics. I'm advocating that he return to a model that you want. You're just throwing your hands up in the air while crossing your fingers. I'll be the first to admit that none of us have any control over this. That, however, doesn't mean that all discussion should cease. Life would be pretty boring if we only talked about things that we could directly influence. You'd never talk about Windows, your IPhone, the Wii, anime, etc.
On the other hand, look at someone like Andrew Jackson. He was a total dickwad. His policies were bad too, but he got what he wanted, for the most part. A dickwad with good policy can make them happen very effectively. Personality really isn't that significant.
For a second, let's consider that personality is a factor. That's fine, but you have no way of judging personality. In your entire life you will never see a single truly genuine moment from any politician. Even if they are genuine, you have no way of knowing. You have to assume that all of these people are actors. They are acting 100% of the time cameras and/or microphones are pointed at them. If you believe Obama has a good personality because you saw him on TV, then you must believe that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a bad ass commando who has been to Mars. Because you have absolutely no reliable information as to whether a candidate has a good personality or not, any decision you make about personality, is completely arbitrary. So even if it matters, you can't make a decision based on it, because you don't have anything to base that decision on.
The best you can do is look at the prior voting record, their stated platform, and their campaign promises, and even then you have to have a lot of trust that they aren't just lying. Someone could easily always vote for the most popular decision, lie in their platform, lie in their promises, and just do whatever it takes to get ahead. Then when they reach the top, give everyone the finger, and do what they really wanted to do. The gaping hole in democracy is the lack of trust and reality between the voter and the candidate. We're effectively voting for fictional characters.
This is why I hate people.