|
Reaganite
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: October 02, 2008, 07:53:28 PM » |
|
what do you call a person from bosnia?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
You get what you pay for America... Welcome to the Obamanation.....
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
 |
« Reply #16 on: October 02, 2008, 07:54:01 PM » |
|
BTW, VP debates don't carry much weight in an election....you guys remember that Kemp Gore debate? yeah, either do I True.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
 |
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2008, 08:06:06 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 02, 2008, 08:12:20 PM by jpn of Seattle »
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
Ahkenaten
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +136/-136
Posts: 1,664
Professor of Angular Mil and Applied Narcotics
|
 |
« Reply #18 on: October 02, 2008, 08:13:41 PM » |
|
All that hockey mom cheese works great in Alaska, but Ohio where people are reeling?
dude have you been to Ohio? or any where else in the midwest? I don't think she babbled incoherently at all, and I'm a bit surprised you think so. She may not have been as pointed or as fluent as Biden (who I like much better of the two) but she certainly didn't sound poor. I'm a little taken on how hackish your posts have been concerning the election...I never took you for a partisan loyalist. Call it a response to Reaganite's op. The op sets the pace. I'm sorry you feel that way neorealist but I think if you watch it again, maybe repeat what she says word for word it is pretty darn close to gibberish. A rapid succession of catch-phrases that she uses to smokescreen the fact she doesn't have an answer. To me that's babble. -She is on the subject of the economy and ends up on the subject of health care without answering the question. -she is on the subject of the economy and the recent crisis and she ends up on the subject of trade. What on Earth has trade to do with the causes of the mortgage/credit crisis? Nothing as far as I can see. -She is on foreign policy and all she can say is McCain has fought for the county. On one or two energy related topics, when she stuck within the bounds of her govenorship of Alaska she didn't sound bad. I could actually see why people would vote for her then. As for Ohio my point is that obviously if this debate is directed at anyone it's the swing states and the undecided. From that angle, do you really think any of her answers sounded even remotely convincing? To someone who's really feeling the pinch right now in any of these swing states do you really think she offered any confidence at all in her or McCain? Do you think when people want answers about the economy right now, or the war, in these swing states they're going to be happy with some silly story 'from back home'? I disagree. Not unless the state is already red. I thought she was honestly much worse than I would've imagined. Babbling maybe seems harsh neo but I think it fits in terms of what one expects from a political debate. Ahk
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 02, 2008, 08:19:35 PM by Ahkenaten »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
 |
« Reply #19 on: October 02, 2008, 08:23:13 PM » |
|
-She is on foreign policy and all she can say is McCain has fought for the county. She said that McCain knows how to win a war. I wonder which war she was referring to?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
Ahkenaten
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +136/-136
Posts: 1,664
Professor of Angular Mil and Applied Narcotics
|
 |
« Reply #20 on: October 02, 2008, 08:36:34 PM » |
|
From the transcript:
IFILLNow, let's talk about -- the next question is to talk about the subprime lending meltdown.
Who do you think was at fault? I start with you, Governor Palin. Was it the greedy lenders? Was it the risky home-buyers who shouldn't have been buying a home in the first place? And what should you be doing about it?
PALIN: Darn right it was the predator lenders, who tried to talk Americans into thinking that it was smart to buy a $300,000 house if we could only afford a $100,000 house. There was deception there, and there was greed and there is corruption on Wall Street. And we need to stop that. - Well that says a lot. Babble
Again, John McCain and I, that commitment that we have made, and we're going to follow through on that, getting rid of that corruption.-Could we be more ambiguous please?
PALIN: One thing that Americans do at this time, also, though, is let's commit ourselves just every day American people, Joe Six Pack, hockey moms across the nation, I think we need to band together and say never again. Never will we be exploited and taken advantage of again by those who are managing our money and loaning us these dollars. We need to make sure that we demand from the federal government strict oversight of those entities in charge of our investments and our savings and we need also to not get ourselves in debt. Let's do what our parents told us before we probably even got that first credit card. Don't live outside of our means. We need to make sure that as individuals we're taking personal responsibility through all of this. It's not the American peoples fault that the economy is hurting like it is, but we have an opportunity to learn a heck of a lot of good lessons through this and say never again will we be taken advantage of. ^^What the heck is that?
Bidens answer:
Well Gwen, two years ago Barack Obama warned about the sub prime mortgage crisis. John McCain said shortly after that in December he was surprised there was a sub prime mortgage problem. John McCain while Barack Obama was warning about what we had to do was literally giving an interview to "The Wall Street Journal" saying that I'm always for cutting regulations. We let Wall Street run wild. John McCain and he's a good man, but John McCain thought the answer is that tried and true Republican response, deregulate, deregulate.
So what you had is you had overwhelming "deregulation." You had actually the belief that Wall Street could self-regulate itself. And while Barack Obama was talking about reinstating those regulations, John on 20 different occasions in the previous year and a half called for more deregulation. As a matter of fact, John recently wrote an article in a major magazine saying that he wants to do for the health care industry deregulate it and let the free market move like he did for the banking industry.
Not the greatest, but not babble. It was like that all the way through imo.
AHk
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
 |
« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2008, 08:37:32 PM » |
|
Babbling maybe seems harsh neo but I think it fits in terms of what one expects from a political debate. Actually, if you read the transcript, "babbling" seems pretty accurate. One example picked almost at random: subject: Bush Admin's policy in Israel-Palestine: Ifill: Has this administration's policy been an abject failure, as the senator says, Governor?
PALIN: No, I do not believe that it has been. But I'm so encouraged to know that we both love Israel, and I think that is a good thing to get to agree on, Senator Biden. I respect your position on that.
No, in fact, when we talk about the Bush administration, there's a time, too, when Americans are going to say, "Enough is enough with your ticket," on constantly looking backwards, and pointing fingers, and doing the blame game.
There have been huge blunders in the war. There have been huge blunders throughout this administration, as there are with every administration.
But for a ticket that wants to talk about change and looking into the future, there's just too much finger-pointing backwards to ever make us believe that that's where you're going.
Positive change is coming, though. Reform of government is coming. We'll learn from the past mistakes in this administration and other administrations.
And we're going to forge ahead with putting government back on the side of the people and making sure that our country comes first, putting obsessive partisanship aside.
That's what John McCain has been known for in all these years. He has been the maverick. He has ruffled feathers.
But I know, Senator Biden, you have respected for them that, and I respect you for acknowledging that. But change is coming.This is babbling. This is not an insightful analysis of a complex foreign policy issue that's been on the front pages for all of Sarah Palin's life. And she isn't able to say one thing interesting or substantial. Not one. Read the transcript, which I posted a link to above. It's the same thing on almost every question. No wonder all the polls say Biden won. But I also agree that one month from now, this won't matter. We have two more debates between the principles, and they aren't going to help McCain enough to turn this election around.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
 |
« Reply #22 on: October 02, 2008, 08:52:44 PM » |
|
Well Joe went there to debate and answer the moderators questions... Moosejaw went there to recite well practiced talking points and catch phrases without regard to what anyone else was saying. She was completely disconnected from the proceedings and rattled off her memorization's with Miss America-like practiced poise. Very sad showing...she didn't melt down or faint or walk off stage but she didn't engage Joe, Gwen or the American people either. She recited what she had been taught to say and that was all... Barbie doll with a pull string. 
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 02, 2008, 08:55:17 PM by freethinker »
|
Logged
|
Yes we can ...and now we will...
|
|
|
neorealist
Global Moderator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +33/-33
Posts: 1,106
Mod of further light
|
 |
« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2008, 12:48:30 AM » |
|
JPN, Akh, and Freethinker...I understand you are all generally well informed about political issues. Do you feel that is representative of the nation as a whole? I ask this b/c I don't necessarily think MOST people vote based on the candidates stances' on issues...nor on their intellectual candor. IMHO, the US public votes on "personality" characteristics, which is why the overwhelming majority of elected officials focus on these traits: trustworthiness, personal similarity, emotions, etc. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/aug/08/politicalbooks.usaI know this article is a bit dated, but its a solid read if you have time. Perhaps Palin was intentionally trying to "simple"...or perhaps she was instructed too...or perhaps she isn't capable of sounding as pointed as Biden. My point, is that what the well informed and educated perceive is not the same as the ill informed. Where do you place the general public? To what degree does the general public influence the vote count? -just a little thought provocation...and for the record (again) I really like Biden. I wish he was the presidential candidate!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on. - Robert Bloch
|
|
|
neorealist
Global Moderator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +33/-33
Posts: 1,106
Mod of further light
|
 |
« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2008, 01:23:41 AM » |
|
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/03/debate.poll/index.htmlIts important not to understand the power of "likability"....that can the distance with the general public. Then again, it was just a VP debate...but if McCain can get his likability number up by that margin, he still stands a chance.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on. - Robert Bloch
|
|
|
Ahkenaten
Forum Administrator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +136/-136
Posts: 1,664
Professor of Angular Mil and Applied Narcotics
|
 |
« Reply #25 on: October 03, 2008, 04:29:43 AM » |
|
I ask this b/c I don't necessarily think MOST people vote based on the candidates stances' on issues...nor on their intellectual candor. IMHO, the US public votes on "personality" characteristics, which is why the overwhelming majority of elected officials focus on these traits: trustworthiness, personal similarity, emotions, etc. http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/aug/08/politicalbooks.usaI know this article is a bit dated, but its a solid read if you have time. Perhaps Palin was intentionally trying to "simple"...or perhaps she was instructed too...or perhaps she isn't capable of sounding as pointed as Biden. My point, is that what the well informed and educated perceive is not the same as the ill informed. Where do you place the general public? To what degree does the general public influence the vote count? Well I agree that plain likability goes far. Your point is well taken. Many will vote 'for' Palin simply because they like her. My view I suppose is based on the undecided or the ones left who are still willing to change their minds. The 'swing' states. IMO, those people are the ones the candidates need to impress and it's those voters who are actually listening and need substance. If it only came down to likability to them I think they would've decided by now. One thing I think is ironic about the whole 'likability' thing is that there were moments when Palin answered or spoke clearly and with obvious knowledge. IMO that just makes the 'pap' answers stick out more. ...and for the record (again) I really like Biden. Look I hear ya. No one's gotta apologize for being Republican or deciding to vote Republican. I'm not going to get pissy with you and I don't blame you if you thought I might. Ahk
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: October 03, 2008, 04:38:41 AM by Ahkenaten »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Toaster
Hero Member
   
Karma: +53/-129
Posts: 741
Burnin' for you
|
 |
« Reply #26 on: October 03, 2008, 05:25:07 AM » |
|
That poor woman. Half the time, she sounded like she was reading from a Doctor Suess book.
I can't believe people actually think she's a good choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
DISCUSSION, n. A method of confirming others in their errors.
The Devil\\'s Dictionary
|
|
|
bringbackwigs
Professional Post-Whore
Global Moderator
Hero Member
   
Karma: +156/-183
Posts: 3,094
Please refrain from taking my posts seriously
|
 |
« Reply #27 on: October 03, 2008, 05:48:32 AM » |
|
That poor woman. Half the time, she sounded like she was reading from a Doctor Suess book.
I can't believe people actually think she's a good choice.
You underestimate the power of Dr. Seuss.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
In religion and politics, people\\\\\\\\\'s beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second hand, and without examination. - Mark Twain 
|
|
|
|