USA Presidential Politics - 2008

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Obama invited me to attend or host a "Platform Party" today. Average citizens getting together to discuss the Dem's national platform.

Clearly, I am his favorite supporter. He emails me more often than that trollop Scarlett Johansson.

You are very funny.

Sure, if you're a woman, you can call another woman "trollop," but if you're John McCain and you do that, it gets pasted all over the Internet!

Steve

[melliedee]

Originally Posted by ryberg

You are very funny.

Sure, if you're a woman, you can call another woman "trollop," but if you're John McCain and you do that, it gets pasted all over the Internet!

Steve

Calm down, sweetie.

I thought it was the c-word and not "trollop" that got him in trouble?

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Calm down, sweetie.

You ARE very funny.

Originally Posted by melliedee

I thought it was the c-word and not "trollop" that got him in trouble?

Ah, well, I think just about everybody would agree that as words go, the former is certainly more... harsh, or whatever, than the latter. However my impression (possibly wrong, of course) was that it wasn't his choice of either word or both words per se but rather that he would use either of them in angry fashion when addressing his wife in front of others in a public setting like that.

This is making me think of the other day when I was seeing a string of stuff on the Internet about PUMA-type groups actually being started by Republicans to create the illusion that McCain would be attractive to former Clinton supporters, and Fox "News" pushing their story a lot, and anti-PUMA-type groups springing up as a reaction and talking about women's rights issues and so forth...

Steve

[horizon200]

Originally Posted by melliedee

Calm down, sweetie.

I thought it was the c-word and not "trollop" that got him in trouble?

Ctrollop is a bad word????

[ryberg]

Originally Posted by horizon200

Ctrollop is a bad word????

Steve

[roni]

Originally Posted by ryberg

Ah, well, I think just about everybody would agree that as words go, the former is certainly more... harsh, or whatever, than the latter.

Steve

I know feminist womyn who have reclaimed the word and use it proudly and frequently.

They do not approve of McCain using it, however.

[ryberg]

Poor Bill Kristol was hoping against hope for a different result in that column of his I posted excerpts from yesterday, but perhaps woe is he that

Murphy won’t join McCain

Mike Murphy, a political consultant who helped mastermind Sen. John McCain’s 2000 presidential campaign, will not be reboarding the Straight Talk Express.

“I do not expect to join the campaign,” Murphy told Politico. “They’re my friends, and I wish them well.”

For weeks, speculation has swirled in political circles that Murphy would be brought in to reprise his role as chief strategist and to help McCain develop a message for a campaign that has largely been without one.

But as McCain relaunches his campaign this week with a new day-to-day manager and a more structured organization, his aides and advisers say the current team atop the campaign will remain in place.

“The core group will stay the same,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), one of McCain’s closest friends and a frequent counselor...

This is also kind of interesting:

Outside groups pose McCain dilemma

Democrats say a group supporting Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) bought television ad time in Virginia that had been released by his campaign the same day, suggesting a possible connection between two groups that legally must remain separate.

The upcoming ads — "Finish the Job," featuring eight Iraq war veterans speaking in black-and-white footage about the success of the surge — mark the most substantial outside assistance McCain has received in the presidential air wars.

The group, Vets for Freedom, calls the purchase a coincidence, and there is no indication otherwise.

But the discovery is the leading edge of a new line of attack Democrats plan against McCain...

Steve

[mallen10]

Iraq's central government is calling for a timetable to withdrawal in its current negotiations with the U.S. State Department. That sounds like the Iraqi's are against Bush's and McCains plans of staying the course for 10, 20, 50, or 100 years. Iraq's prime minister is saying either a timetable for withdrawal, or immediate withdrawal. Sounds like the Iraqi government is behind Obama's position for bring our troops home.

[ryberg]

J. Sidney McCain's campaign really is making him look hapless. Check out this case of déjà vu all over again:

March 28th, 2008

McCain to Start Biography Tour

While John McCain is in Las Vegas raising money, his campaign released a new ad billed as the first television ad of the general election and is preparing for a bus tour across America where McCain will be reintroduced to America.

The ad is entitled “624787”...

JULY 8th, 2008

McCain goes up with re-introduction spot

While it is just a reintroduction, the spot reflects the tug McCain's compelling life story can exert on his advisers...

So over three months go by, and his campaign comes up with -- what, again? Oh, another reintroduction of the compelling life story of their candidate.

I feel for the guy, really. It's like he's the sacrificial lamb paying for the sins of the Bush adminstration. It's almost like Bush is beating him yet again, just in stealth fashion as compared to the first time. Almost because of course there's another candidate in the contest, and one who's proven to be a strong one. But also almost because his own campaign seems to have little to no clue how to sell their candidate.

Unless there just is nothing to sell, I don't know!

Steve

[ryberg]

I found this NYT article to be rather interesting on a number of points, or to lead to rather interesting questions (even where not taken up in the article). Also wanted to post it for you in particular, Jacko, as you have seemed similarly interested in this particular campaign debt issue. But I thought many here might find it interesting.

Obama Donors Aren’t Rushing to Aid Clinton

Steve

[tmc]

Originally Posted by ryberg

J. Sidney McCain's campaign really is making him look hapless. Check out this case of déjà vu all over again:

March 28th, 2008

JULY 8th, 2008

So over three months go by, and his campaign comes up with -- what, again? Oh, another reintroduction of the compelling life story of their candidate.

I feel for the guy, really. It's like he's the sacrificial lamb paying for the sins of the Bush adminstration. It's almost like Bush is beating him yet again, just in stealth fashion as compared to the first time. Almost because of course there's another candidate in the contest, and one who's proven to be a strong one. But also almost because his own campaign seems to have little to no clue how to sell their candidate.

Unless there just is nothing to sell, I don't know!

Steve

and

Originally Posted by ryberg

I found this NYT article to be rather interesting on a number of points, or to lead to rather interesting questions (even where not taken up in the article). Also wanted to post it for you in particular, Jacko, as you have seemed similarly interested in this particular campaign debt issue. But I thought many here might find it interesting.

Obama Donors Aren’t Rushing to Aid Clinton

Steve

With what you said being the case, does the fact that McCain is within hailing distance, at least, of Obama mean that perhaps Hillary is not totally out of the picture? Under present political circumstances the Democrat candidate should be a lead-pipe cinch, which Obama is clearly not, at least as of now. She has not yet released her delegates; could there be mischief in Denver?

[beerbreath]

Originally Posted by tmc

and




With what you said being the case, does the fact that McCain is within hailing distance, at least, of Obama mean that perhaps Hillary is not totally out of the picture? Under present political circumstances the Democrat candidate should be a lead-pipe cinch, which Obama is clearly not, at least as of now. She has not yet released her delegates; could there be mischief in Denver?

As I stated in an earlier post.Newsweek has Obama up by 15%.And Obama is ahead in PA,OH and FL.

I like our chances with Obama.

[tmc]

Originally Posted by beerbreath

As I stated in an earlier post.Newsweek has Obama up by 15%.And Obama is ahead in PA,OH and FL.

I like our chances with Obama.

I don't put much stock in polls, but nonetheless the Newsweek poll is of marginal value as it is a national poll, and not a state-by-state breakdown. Building up big margins of voters within a state does not do a candidate any favors if he is too close to call, or behind, in other states. I am not saying this is the case, the Newsweek poll does not illuminate here. By the way, many polls show McCain still up in Florida.

If you look at the methodology employed in the Newsweek poll it appears that self-identified Republicans are underrepresented by a few points. The number of white, non-Hispanics is about 8 points lower, and the number of college-educated people is about 15 points lower, than the election of 2004 results showed (according to Census Bureau data). The age data is skewed towards the youngest group of 18-39 year-olds, to the detriment of the over 65's. All-in-all, I don't see much validity in the Newsweek poll, and subsequent polls showing the race on a national level to be much closer, with Obama enjoying a 2 to 5 percent national lead, seem to bear out my point.

[beerbreath]

Originally Posted by tmc

I don't put much stock in polls, but nonetheless the Newsweek poll is of marginal value as it is a national poll, and not a state-by-state breakdown. Building up big margins of voters within a state does not do a candidate any favors if he is too close to call, or behind, in other states. I am not saying this is the case, the Newsweek poll does not illuminate here. By the way, many polls show McCain still up in Florida.

If you look at the methodology employed in the Newsweek poll it appears that self-identified Republicans are underrepresented by a few points. The number of white, non-Hispanics is about 8 points lower, and the number of college-educated people is about 15 points lower, than the election of 2004 results showed (according to Census Bureau data). The age data is skewed towards the youngest group of 18-39 year-olds, to the detriment of the over 65's. All-in-all, I don't see much validity in the Newsweek poll, and subsequent polls showing the race on a national level to be much closer, with Obama enjoying a 2 to 5 percent national lead, seem to bear out my point.

I will bet the farm that if Newsweek had McBush up 15% points,you would have posted something completely different.

Anyhow,According to your numbers,smart people are going for Obama,cool.

[ashburnva]

Originally Posted by mallen10

Iraq's central government is calling for a timetable to withdrawal in its current negotiations with the U.S. State Department. That sounds like the Iraqi's are against Bush's and McCains plans of staying the course for 10, 20, 50, or 100 years. Iraq's prime minister is saying either a timetable for withdrawal, or immediate withdrawal. Sounds like the Iraqi government is behind Obama's position for bring our troops home.

The fact that there is an ability for the government to make take such a position is the direct result of the course being stayed, the surge being implemented, and definately not meant to extend support to a freshman senator/community activist's position (now apparently being rethought) to unilateraly abandon the Iraqi's to their fate, by imposition of a timeline established for political expediency.
It is also an appeal to the patriotism/nationalism of the Iraqi people prior to their elections, and I am sure the actual terms, as opposed to the rhetoric, will provide for a substantial presence for the next few years, whether or not Barack Obama is elected (and I am almost certainly sure he will be).
I shudder to think what would have happened if the Durbin/Murtha/Code Pink crowd had got their way a couple of years ago.