McCain/Palin v. Obama/Biden

[Khorum]

Originally Posted by Badass

PSSSST. Hey dude. If you want to talk about terrorists....talk about a real terrorist like.....OSAMA BIN LADEN. Where is he and why have you failed so miserably for SEVEN FUCKING YEARS to kill him? How can your neo-con friends be SO INCREDIBLY STUPID.

Terrorist Scale of Evilness

Osama Bin Laden > Willie LOL WHO GIVES A FUCK Ayers.

LOL, I dunno, why don't we find out how many voters actually DO give a fuck about Ayers after that interview tonight. We should have a decent clue by in a couple days.

You doing scales now? That's impressive, why don't you start with learning how to read a fucking CALENDAR first. Or hell, how about a a fucking DICTIONARY. You really __ARE__ Whoopi Goldberg aren't you?

There's 20 million bucks on OBL's head right now. Get to it tough guy, maybe your "college" intuition will actually do you some real good out there. Oh wait! You've never thought to actually put your fucking balls on the line for any of those ridiculous opinions you've inflicted on us alongside your VIPAWARDSLOLOL badassitude? HOW FUCKING SURPRISING!!

Unless you actually man the fuck up and show the least bit of spine to back up your righteous second-hand indignity, try to maybe get A FUCKING CLUE before you lecture anyone on courage or education.

[Soriak]

Fake outrage... some might call it whining. It's good to see it still works.

[Mippo]

It's been SEVEN years since 9/11, almost to the day which is exactly what he said....

Before you tell someone to get a CALENDAR, maybe you should do the same?

[Jovec]

Originally Posted by gn0me

It gives dumbass McCain/Palin supporters an easy way to twist Obama's words and play the gender card.

John McCain’s campaign said Tuesday Barack Obama’s reference to “lipstick on a pig” to describe the Republican’s vow to bring change to Washington was offensive language, and a slap at VP nominee Sarah Palin – despite the fact that the Arizona senator himself used the phrase last year to describe a policy proposal of Hillary Clinton’s.

From: CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - McCain camp says ‘lipstick on a pig’ is trip through the mud « - Blogs from CNN.com


The 2008 election had so much potential, then Obama picked Biden to cover all the weaknesses McCain said he had instead of continuing his message through his VP. McCain picked horribly unqualified Palin - there's no f'in way he picks her if Obama picked Clinton as Palin would be considered a "me too" pick (if she can't stand on her own...). Obama would have guaranteed himself the win with Clinton but who is to say she would have accepted and/or maybe he didn't want a VP with that much power (ala Cheney) he couldn't control.

The hypocrisy is in full swing. As an example; Repubican's applaud Palin and her daughter for keeping the baby and getting married to the father, yet if that situation happened to Obama's girls, "family values", or the lack of, would be on the lips of every Republican pundit.

I appauld Bill Maher for being so direct as he is in this clip. Obama should hire him as his new campaign manager to tackle issues head on.

See: CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Maher sounds off on Palin « - Blogs from CNN.com

[Khorum]

Originally Posted by Zhaun's_Shade

Am I missing something, what is wrong with that? The lipstick on a pig comment?

Not, not really the comment (though the McCain campaign will milk it for what it's worth) but Obama going negative on the stump. That's a tremendous risk because for every attack he makes, McCain can escalate with something far FAR more devastating from Obama's radical history.

Which was the point I was trying to make earlier. Every dKos "gotcha" about Palin using her allowance will come back as one of Obama's massive multimillion-dollar patronage contract deals. Stuff like that. It's an escalation Obama can't sustain because there are standing doubts about his loyalty and his corrupt 17-year long history in Chicago.

But the most harmful thing really is Obama going negative AT ALL, since that forfeits his "change" from good-old-boy politics image. For some reason David Axelrod has decided they should stop going negative-by-proxy (which worked well against Clinton) and figured Obama should start slinging mud personally.

Originally Posted by Soriak

Fake outrage... some might call it whining. It's good to see it still works.

If there's one thing EVERYONE knows about McCain, it's that his outrage is rarely fake.

[Mimirswell]

Originally Posted by Khorum

If there's one thing EVERYONE knows about McCain, it's that his outrage is rarely fake.

Significant difference between the person and their campaign. His campaign has taken substantial efforts painting Palin as a victim (a clever play in my opinion as it lets them utilize her gender while crying sexism at the same time) and this let's them capitalize further.

[gn0me]

Originally Posted by Khorum

But the most harmful thing really is Obama going negative AT ALL, since that forfeits his "change" from good-old-boy politics image. For some reason David Axelrod has decided they should stop going negative-by-proxy (which worked well against Clinton) and figured Obama should start slinging mud personally.

Pointing out the hypocrisy and flat out lies of the opponent isn't necessarily "going negative" (Bridge to Nowhere bullshit, flip flopping on change, etc). Obama is going on the offensive, which he absolutely needs to be doing after two weeks of Palin dominating the media coverage. The McCain campaign made this dirty by using that little bitch Palin as their attack dog at the convention. The gloves are off, so seeing Obama going on the offensive should not be a surprise.

Anyway, it's not as if Obama ran a daytime attack ad completely distorting a bill in order to scare little old ladies into thinking his opponent is a child predator out to sexually educate your kindergartners.

Originally Posted by Khorum

If there's one thing EVERYONE knows about McCain, it's that his outrage is rarely fake.

Lmao, it is in the case of this "lip stick on a pig" controversy. His campaign is in complete control and we'll see every trick in the book in the next two months.

[Animale]

I really think that Obama is going to pull a "Hillary as Secretary of State" thing out of his bag soon. Clinton didn't really want to be VP as it entails her hitching her wagon 100% to Obama. This way, if Obama is crashing and burning as President she can disengage and run against him, while maintaining her (and Bill's) visibility in the public eye while undertaking the repair of the State Department - probably among the most important jobs within the next administration.

Other than VP it's the most prestigious position, probably better than Senator, and offers the most independence of any Cabinet position. For Obama, it brings back the Clinton base, while not ceding his position as boss if she gets too off the reservation. If it's not going well, they can easily part ways while maintaining civility if needed.

Win win. Hopefully it will happen. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't already (maybe Clinton turned it down?)

[Soriak]

Hasn't really been debated yet... what's up with generalgate?

General Campbell of the Alaskan National Guard says repeatedly that Palin never gave an executive order. The federal government would take charge.

Last Friday, he goes on Fox news and praises Palin's leadership - saying the national guard is run by her.

On Monday, Palin promotes him to a three star.

Details here: VetVoice:: Alaska National Guard General Changes Story; Palin Promotes

Can we critique McCain's daughter for a gaffe, when she campaigns for her father? She was on the today show and said "No one knows what war is like other than my family. Period."



Or simply baiting others into attacking yet another candidate's daughter?

[Zitar]

Originally Posted by Soriak

Or simply baiting others into attacking yet another candidate's daughter?

I will take she is just dumb for $100 Alex. I know this is the interwebs, but not everything is a conspiracy sometimes people say shit out of stupidity.

[chu]

Originally Posted by Mimirswell

Because Palin made a hokey joke about the difference between a Hockey mom and a pitbull and the answer was lipstick. The criticism shouldn't hold because "lipstick on a pig" is a common phrase. One Obama has used in the past prior to Palin joining the ticket and one McCain has used quite a few times as well.

Yes, because the majority of Americans are 100% up to date about every single thing everyone has said in the past 18 months.

People are going to casually see the tidbit on their morning television and roll their eyes and be stunned he said it.

It's somewhat shocking to see Obama run his campaign into the ground as of late. Wtf did he fucking just say.... "that's just calling something the same thing when its something different"; that was so profound. Someone missing their teleprompter today?

[Khorum]

Originally Posted by chu

Yes, because the majority of Americans are 100% up to date about every single thing everyone has said in the past 18 months.

People are going to casually see the tidbit on their morning television and roll their eyes and be stunned he said it.

It's somewhat shocking to see Obama run his campaign into the ground as of late. Wtf did he fucking just say.... "that's just calling something the same thing when its something different"; that was so profound. Someone missing their teleprompter today?

hey weren't you a clinton democrat? Where do you stand now? Kinda curious where The Hiram Key went too.

[Jedite]

Originally Posted by Animale

I really think that Obama is going to pull a "Hillary as Secretary of State" thing out of his bag soon. Clinton didn't really want to be VP as it entails her hitching her wagon 100% to Obama. This way, if Obama is crashing and burning as President she can disengage and run against him, while maintaining her (and Bill's) visibility in the public eye while undertaking the repair of the State Department - probably among the most important jobs within the next administration.

Other than VP it's the most prestigious position, probably better than Senator, and offers the most independence of any Cabinet position. For Obama, it brings back the Clinton base, while not ceding his position as boss if she gets too off the reservation. If it's not going well, they can easily part ways while maintaining civility if needed.

Win win. Hopefully it will happen. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't already (maybe Clinton turned it down?)

If they are going in that direction it will probably not be announced until october.. Right now theres too much Palin craze for it to give a significant bump, they are probably waiting for that ship to die down and then get the bump that Hilary as Secretary of State would give.

[kegkilla]

Originally Posted by Animale

I really think that Obama is going to pull a "Hillary as Secretary of State" thing out of his bag soon. Clinton didn't really want to be VP as it entails her hitching her wagon 100% to Obama. This way, if Obama is crashing and burning as President she can disengage and run against him, while maintaining her (and Bill's) visibility in the public eye while undertaking the repair of the State Department - probably among the most important jobs within the next administration.

Other than VP it's the most prestigious position, probably better than Senator, and offers the most independence of any Cabinet position. For Obama, it brings back the Clinton base, while not ceding his position as boss if she gets too off the reservation. If it's not going well, they can easily part ways while maintaining civility if needed.

Win win. Hopefully it will happen. In fact, I'm surprised it hasn't already (maybe Clinton turned it down?)

you underestimate the bad bloom between the Clintons and Obamas. the Clintons absolutely loathe the Obamas. think what you will about the whole thing but they have pretty much gone out of their way to do as little as possible for the Obama campaign.

do you really think making Hillary secretary of state would bring back the Clinton base? not a chance. go to the Hillary forum and read the shit those angry broads are spouting off. they'll interpret the move as a slap in the face. they want Hillary as President, not secretary of state behind this giant egomaniac.

[Mimirswell]

Originally Posted by chu

Yes, because the majority of Americans are 100% up to date about every single thing everyone has said in the past 18 months.

Oh definitely but many news channels will also show clips of McCain saying the exact same thing in multiple scenarios and that will largely quell any major controversy.

Originally Posted by Kegkilla

do you really think making Hillary secretary of state would bring back the Clinton base? not a chance. go to the Hillary forum and read the shit those angry broads are spouting off. they'll interpret the move as a slap in the face. they want Hillary as President, not secretary of state behind this giant egomaniac.

The hardcore hillary forums are not the supporters Obama would be trying to capitalize in such a move. They may make up a base of 10,000 individuals but Obama really only needs to engage 70-80% of Hillary's base and do enough damage control on the rest that <10% switch over to McCain.