McCain vs. Obama

[Araxen]

Thread Rulez: Do not derail into threads talking about:

1. What your opinion is about how the Iraq War was handled.
2. Bush.
3. How 9/11 was handled.
4. Anything else that has nothing to do with McCain or Obama.

With the Democrat primary season basically over it is time to discuss Obama vs McCain.

I believe Obama will win pretty easily as he has a ton of money and will be able to paint McCain however he wants all the way up till November. It is just something McCain can't compete with.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

The Republicans will run on a platform of Jeremiah Wright. Nothing else will matter to them. No other issue will be explained. No policy issue, no innovative approaches, no mention of Iraq. The Republican Noise Machine and the old coot will play Jeremiah Wright clips over and over and over and over. When Jeremiah Wright does not look like he will win the White House for them, the Republicans will start bringing in other miscellaneous blacks like Farrakhan into the picture or work to demonize Michelle Obama.

This election is a defining moment in American history. We can chose between the gutter politics and bigotry of the Republican party or we can move this country forward and put someone very smart in the White House. As Republicans you need to realize that the Republican party is no longer the party that brought us the "Contract with America." It has been hijacked by the lunatic fringe (Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Laura Ingraham, Bill O'Reilly, Ann Coulter, Mark Levin and FOX News)

Newt Gingrich has written an article to tell the Republicans that Jeremiah Wright can not win for them but they will not listen. They will stay in the gutter and lose the election.

My Plea to Republicans - HUMAN EVENTS

The Anti-Obama, Anti-Wright, and Anti-Clinton GOP Model Has Been Tested -- And It Failed

The Republican brand has been so badly damaged that if Republicans try to run an anti-Obama, anti- Reverend Wright, or (if Senator Clinton wins), anti-Clinton campaign, they are simply going to fail.

This model has already been tested with disastrous results.

In 2006, there were six incumbent Republican Senators who had plenty of money, the advantage of incumbency, and traditionally successful consultants.

But the voters in all six states had adopted a simple position: "Not you." No matter what the GOP Senators attacked their opponents with, the voters shrugged off the attacks and returned to, "Not you."

The danger for House and Senate Republicans in 2008 is that the voters will say, "Not the Republicans."

[Etoille]

It is time.

Will this thread be as long as the Clinton and Obama thread?

What is McCains biggest challenge against Obama?

Who will score the independent vote?

Will the older members of the Dem party switch to McCain?

Will younger members of the Dem party turn out at all?

Will Khorum reach an incredible 30 red link record in one post?

Will IRB give up his crusade against Fox News?

Stay tuned!

Edit: 1st page.

[GrobbeeTrull2.0]

IRB - while I support your plight temuously, we really don't need to be reminded of your record-player rhetoric.

Seriously, we get it. Let's try to talk about issues here, because I think Obama is generally going to do his best to rise above the politics and smear tactics that the Republican party will undoubtedly unleash.

I hope (there's that word!) that it'll be enough for most voters to see that he's a man who's doing his best to promote dialogue instead of trying to tear down his opponents.

[Tuco]

Thread Rulez: Do not derail into threads talking about:

1. What your opinion is about how the Iraq War was handled.
2. Bush.
3. How 9/11 was handled.
4. Anything else that has nothing to do with McCain or Obama.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by Araxen

Thread Rulez: Do not derail into threads talking about:

1. What your opinion is about how the Iraq War was handled.
2. Bush.

Even as a McCain supporter I think both of these topics are justified, if only for purposes of showing why McCain is different from Bush.

[Tuco]

Originally Posted by Payndar Circusdorf

Even as a McCain supporter I think both of these topics are justified, if only for purposes of showing why McCain is different from Bush.

This is fine.

[Sharmai]

Is it possible to subtract one vote from the poll? I voted while not logged in for Obama and had to switch to other computer to vote while logged in since I couldn't change it. You can subtract -1 obama vote if possible. Why not make it a public but registered user only poll? If possible?

[Tuco]

Black people: Cheating for Obama in 2008.

[Sharmai]

Originally Posted by Etoille

1. What is McCains biggest challenge against Obama?
2. Will younger members of the Dem party turn out at all?

1. Securing young voters. He has a long road ahead of him for this. I think his best bet would be a VP who resonates with young voters.
2. Most definitely.


Question
8. Who should be the in the VP selections for each nominee?
9. Does Hilary have any chance at all as Obama's VP?
10. Would Hilary as a VP now still be a good idea?
11. Would Hilary as Obama's VP be to much against Obama's message to be possible?

[Payndar Circusdorf]

Originally Posted by I'm Rich Bitch

The Republicans will run on a platform of Jeremiah Wright. Nothing else will matter to them. No other issue will be explained. No policy issue, no innovative approaches, no mention of Iraq.

McCain may not mention Wright, but he won't have to. He can let the media and the 527s and Hannity etc do that for him.

McCain himself will outright pummel Obama as a tax-and-spend Dukakis-style liberal. Obama has at least managed to avoid looking like a Kerry-style flip-flopper on most issues besides Wright, but he hasn't had to defend the weaknesses of his liberal stances in any debates. When he's arguing with Hillary over their health-care plan, the two of them agree on certain underlying things that McCain is going to make him defend.

McCain is going to argue that he was right all along on corn-based ethanol and that he was right all along on How To Win In Iraq and he's going to have evidence to back up both of those claims. He's going to demand any evidence from Obama whatsoever that Barack took a post-partisan stance on ANY difficult issue while in the Senate, while pointing to his own leadership in the Gang of 14.

Those are real issues that all play to McCain's strengths among independents and assault the core weaknesses of Obama.

[I'm Rich Bitch]

Obama should choose Jim Webb as VP. McCain should choose Mark Sanford as VP.

I would like Chuck Hagel as VP for Obama but I don't think the Democrats would go for it. I would be satisfied with Hagel as Secretary of Defense however. Obama needs a ex-Military, White, Christian male as VP. Maybe even someone slightly racist to get the bigot vote.

I don't think he can afford to bring Hillary onto the ticket. Not only does she represent past politics but I don't think the people will vote for a black guy and a woman.

[Soygen]

You can vote while not logged in still?

[GrobbeeTrull2.0]

Originally Posted by Payndar Circusdorf

McCain himself will outright pummel Obama as a tax-and-spend Dukakis-style liberal.

I don't think McCain will have such an easy time with it - a fair number of people on the Republican side have admitted as much that taxes will go up regardless, it's just the "who" and how much.

Generally, I think you'll find that people are more likely to accept higher taxes if they are for the right reason - i.e. Healthcare, Infrastructure, etc.

Obama has at least managed to avoid looking like a Kerry-style flip-flopper on most issues besides Wright, but he hasn't had to defend the weaknesses of his liberal stances in any debates. When he's arguing with Hillary over their health-care plan, the two of them agree on certain underlying things that McCain is going to make him defend.

Well, can you enlighten us as to the strengths of the McCain health plan? I'm on his website, and I see this:

Originally Posted by McCain

While still having the option of employer-based coverage, every family will also have the option of receiving a direct refundable tax credit - effectively cash - of $2,500 for individuals and $5,000 for families to offset the cost of insurance. Families will be able to choose the insurance provider that suits them best and the money would be sent directly to the insurance provider. Those obtaining innovative insurance that costs less than the credit can deposit the remainder in expanded Health Savings Accounts

Sounds to me a lot like financial aid for colleges - where tuition costs go up just so that they can max out the financial aid they receive from the government. How is this supposed to keep costs down, if insurance companies are getting government handouts? Of course, this only applies if you can get health insurance. Which leads us to:

Originally Posted by McCain

As President, John McCain will work with governors to develop a best practice model that states can follow - a Guaranteed Access Plan or GAP - that would reflect the best experience of the states to ensure these patients have access to health coverage. One approach would establish a nonprofit corporation that would contract with insurers to cover patients who have been denied insurance and could join with other state plans to enlarge pools and lower overhead costs. There would be reasonable limits on premiums, and assistance would be available for Americans below a certain income level

So, in order to make sure everyone gets covered - he'll make a corporation (non-profit) that gets no-contest bids for every health insurance company that operates in that state. Essentially, he's setting up another insurance company, yet still involves people paying out of pocket for their healthcare.

He's comparing private insurance versus state run insurance, except in this case, the state government healthcare already vastly outperforms private corporations on almost every measure.

Maybe you can enlighten me on how this is supposed to magically force insurance companies to stop colluding and start working towards lowering costs?

McCain is going to argue that he was right all along on corn-based ethanol

Short memory span, eh?

Originally Posted by McCain 2003

Ethanol is a product that would not exist if Congress didn't create an artificial market for it. No one would be willing to buy it... Yet thanks to agricultural subsidies and ethanol producer subsidies, it is now a very big business - tens of billions of dollars that have enriched a handful of corporate interests - primarily one big corporation, ADM. Ethanol does nothing to reduce fuel consumption, nothing to increase our energy independence, nothing to improve air quality."

Originally Posted by McCain 2006

I support ethanol and I think it is a vital, a vital alternative energy source not only because of our dependency on foreign oil but its greenhouse gas reduction effects.

Originally Posted by McCain 2007

The widespread use of ethanol from corn could result in nearly twice the greenhouse gas emissions as the gasoline it would replace because of expected land-use changes, researchers concluded Thursday. The study challenges the rush to biofuels as a response to global warming.

Quite the flip-flop there. Shows excellent political judgement.

On the other-hand, Obama does indeed support Ethanol subsidies - but as a means to creating a sustainable bio-fuels industry, with corn-ethanol as the gateway into market viability, as shown here:

"Those family farmers and local ethanol producers have set an example for how to embrace new technologies to lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and they've in turn strengthened the rural economy," Senator Obama said. "I've listened to local producers and heard first-hand how the dive in ethanol prices is having real, day to day effects on their livelihood. We need to ensure that Washington is giving them a fair shot to compete against the big oil companies that have dominated this industry, kept us dependent on foreign oil, and compromised our environment. We are at a critical time in the history of our renewable fuels industry, and we need to fix the imbalance in the market that's working against locally owned plants. If we are serious about creating clean, renewable sources of energy, we need to support the creation of a domestic biofuels industry that will take us from corn ethanol to cellulosic ethanol. It won't happen if these ethanol plants go out of business because ethanol prices continue to fall and Washington insiders continue to block much-needed reforms. I thank Senator Harkin for his longstanding leadership on this issue."

Growing pains, if you will. Which is a smart move, as everyone generally accepts that cellulosic ethanol is the best solution for both cheap energy, reducing foreign dependency on oil, and keeping our air clean.

and that he was right all along on How To Win In Iraq and he's going to have evidence to back up both of those claims.

Well, I thought we already "won" the Iraq War... Mission Accomplished! What, exactly, are the criteria for winning? And how have we "won" it again?

He's going to demand any evidence from Obama whatsoever that Barack took a post-partisan stance on ANY difficult issue while in the Senate, while pointing to his own leadership in the Gang of 14.

Nevermind that Obama's first junior sponsored bill was with McCain, or that McCain and Obama have co-sponsored several bills in the past.

Those are real issues that all play to McCain's strengths among independents and assault the core weaknesses of Obama.

Sounds nice, has no substance.

[Payndar Circusdorf]

I don't think there's anything wrong with a federalist approach to health care. Half the point of federalism is to permit the states to act as labs; by damn, experiment one way in a few, another way in a few others, and see how it works.

As for McCain on ethanol, if you can find any time in which he advocated ethanol subsidies (as opposed to trying it out as an alternative fuel) then I'll join the flip-flop chorus.

I don't think there's anything flip-floppish, however, about changing your views on scientific matters when the science itself changes.

Edit: As for Obama being post-partisan, I ask you to reread my statement closely. I've seen nothing from Obama that shows him reaching across the partisan divide on any HARD issue like judges.