Barack Obama vs John McCain: Can Dems Avoid Defeat?

[mathwonk]

i hate to ask this but...

If that nincompoop george bush could defeat war hero john kerry, how can barack obama defeat john mccain? Is it possible because the electorate may have learned a lesson from watching gw at work for 8 years? or will the dems again snatch defeat from victory?

 

[WarPhalange]

His "POW" reserves are running dry. He's uses that every single chance he gets.

"Senator, you said you don't know how many houses you own?"
"I was a POW"

"Senator, how can you be for the troops if you vote against bills that help them?"
"I was a POW"

Those are just the last two I remember. But it seems like any time something negative against him comes out, that's what he uses.

And then there's this gem I found on Youtube:

ANwL_7efNZg[/youtube]

 

[OrbitalPower]

Well, yah, but I think there's a good chance McCain could still win. Kerry was polling ahead around this time I believe, even far ahead a few times, and he still lost.

Ultimately the American people get suckered into the Republican's propaganda tactics so I would prepare yourself for a McCain victory.

 

[mathwonk]

did you hear on npr that there is one dallas businessman who gave 3 million bucks to the swift boat campaign against kerry. he has now pledged 3.9 million to the swift boat campaign against obama. their latest ad asks morons in general, why obama happens to know a radical from the 60's who was a member of a group that bombed a building when obama was about 1 year old. pretty damning, if your iq is 25 or so. i.e. it could change the whole election.

this group of sleeze balls is called the american issues campaign or something. they even hold tax exempt status, recently purchased from another defunct org, which requires that most of their work be non political! when obama's campaign challenged their qualifications for such tax exemption, their lawyer said, and i quote: " i expected this, after all these guys play hardball." i laughed out loud.

thought for the day: how stupid and/or perfidious can one be and still be interviewed on the radio and represent a major candidate? apparently there is no limit.

 

[WarPhalange]

My hope in America has dwindled in the past years. If McCain is elected, I don't think I'll want to stay here.

It's like being on the Titanic and being the only one who sees the iceberg coming.

 

[mathwonk]

don't give up big guy! have children and "teach them well". but i feel your frustration. some times i aspire to join my friends in italy or france, but after gw i can't afford to!

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

don't give up big guy! have children and "teach them well". but i feel your frustration. some times i aspire to join my friends in italy or france, but after gw i can't afford to!

no doubt beautiful, but you really think the governments run better? I assume you are +30 in age? If so, then you likely did not save and invest well. that is not GWs fault.

 

[mathwonk]

i will not even discuss gw's role in whether ones investments are doing well or not. I'm sure you can do better than that if you try. as rick said in casablanaca about paris, bringing up the stockmarket is poor salesmanship for gw. (have you checked your house assessment lately?)

i'm watching the colbear repore, and he is interviewing a guy who says his business is booming! who? a repo man ! i love it.

 

[Gokul43201]

... or will the dems again snatch defeat from victory?

That's certainly possible...though I'd word it differently.

Here's the funny part: 8 years ago, Republicans decided that George Bush was hands down, way better than McCain. Now, after agreeing that Bush is the pits, they insist that McCain will be hands down way better than Bush!

 

[WarPhalange]

don't give up big guy! have children and "teach them well".

Doesn't that like involve... touching...a girl? Eww gross!

 

[russ_watters]

If that nincompoop george bush could defeat war hero john kerry, how can barack obama defeat john mccain? Is it possible because the electorate may have learned a lesson from watching gw at work for 8 years? or will the dems again snatch defeat from victory?

Obama is a much stronger candidate than Kerry. Kerry's record on the war was not at all impressive when you look at the total package, which included his extremist anti-war views and associations at the end of the war. The handful of relatively minor medals he got could not possibly overcome that.

Even that aside, Kerry was at best a mediocre candidate. He wasn't charismatic, he looked unhealthy, and he did not inspire confidence or inspiration. Bush won a battle of the mediocres.

Both Obama and McCain are probably the strongest candidates we've seen in my lifetime. Either would defeat any of the candidates the other party has put up in the past 30 years, with the possible exception of Reagan.

Reagan won the Presidency because he was a cheerleader and little else. And that's what Obama is trying to do, but times are more complicated today than they were in 1980 and people are starting to ask what his real ideas are. I'm sure Obama will get a huge bounce from the convention - when he gives a prepared speech, he makes people stand up and cheer. But after that fades, he'll have to start convincing people he has some substance.

McCain, being older and better known is much less of a question mark. There isn't as much he can do in the next few months to help or hurt himself. So really, it's up to Obama. If his popularity peaks soon and starts to fall again as the rapture wears off, he'll lose.

 

[WarPhalange]

Of course. How could anyone defeat His Holyness, the Sacred Cow, God Emperor Reagan?

 

[russ_watters]

Here's the funny part: 8 years ago, Republicans decided that George Bush was hands down, way better than McCain.

That isn't even true, much less funny! Bush won the nomination because the Republican power base threw its support behind him. He got the money and 3rd party attacks to take McCain down, despite McCain's strong start and popular support. It certainly was not an unequivocable victory for Bush.

This is more common knowledge stuff, but here's the easy reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000#Republican_Party_nomination

George W. Bush, became the early frontrunner, acquiring unprecedented funding and a broad base of leadership support based on his governorship of Texas and the name-recognition and connections of the Bush family. Several aspirants withdrew before the Iowa Caucus because they were unable to secure funding and endorsements sufficient to remain competitive with Bush.

Bush, the governor of Texas, a son of a former president, and the favored candidate of the Christian right, was portrayed in the media as the establishment candidate. McCain, with the support of many moderate Republicans and Independents, portrayed himself as a crusading insurgent who focused on campaign reform...

McCain won a 48%-30% victory over Bush in the New Hampshire primary. In the South Carolina primary, however, Bush soundly defeated McCain. Some credit Bush's win to the fact that it was the first major closed primary in 2000, which negated McCain's strong advantage among independents. Some McCain supporters blamed it on the Bush campaign, accusing them of mudslinging and dirty tricks, such as push polling that implied that McCain's adopted Bangladeshi-born daughter was an African-American child he fathered out of wedlock.[6] McCain's loss in South Carolina damaged his campaign. Although McCain won a few additional primaries, Bush took the majority of the remaining contests and the nomination at the Republican National Convention in Philadelphia.

Bush was, in essence, pre-selected.

 

[Gokul43201]

It certainly was not an unequivocable victory for Bush.

Did McCain win any states besides the loony, left wing New England states? I think Bush won over 40 states. Political machinations aside, that's a drubbin'. McCain didn't ever get popular with bread and butter Republicans - he won mostly from the backing of independents (and that's why he won the states that he did).

Bush was, in essence, pre-selected.

And for a reason. Russ, you may not like to believe this, but the Republican party is way more religious and socially conservative than you are. And way more religious and socially conservative than McCain was. McCain learned that the hard way. If McCain had run another 2000 Primary this year, he'd have lost again, to the new Party favorite. This year, though, the Party was having a little harder time picking a favorite: their star candidate was a Mormon; Giuliani, a social liberal; Huckabee was too clean for politics; Paul was an anti-war freakshow; and the others were non-starters (even Thompson).

But McCain wasn't taking any chances this year, was he? He ingratiated himself with the Christian Right, hired the Rove-Bush political attack dogs (yes, the gang that slimed McCain in 2000) to run his campaign, chose to milk his POW experience dry, decided it was a good idea to equivocate on intelligent design and established a voting record and campaign positions almost exactly matching Bush's (and proudly saying so himself). He knew what he needed to do to appeal to the Republican base, and it worked. The McCain that was rejected by Republicans for Bush is now the new Party messiah.

 

[Astronuc]

The Bush campaign trashed McCain in South Carolina. McCain had a reasonable chance before that, but he never recovered from that.

Now unfortunately, McCain is sounding more like Bush.

 

[turbo]

The Bush campaign trashed McCain in South Carolina. McCain had a reasonable chance before that, but he never recovered from that.

Now unfortunately, McCain is sounding more like Bush.

I liked THAT McCain and probably would have voted for him in the general election. I detest the new McCain - and that's quite a turn-around.

 

[isly ilwott]

If that nincompoop george bush could defeat war hero john kerry, how can barack obama defeat john mccain? Is it possible because the electorate may have learned a lesson from watching gw at work for 8 years? or will the dems again snatch defeat from victory?

Your basic premise is faulty. John Kerry was no war hero. John Kerry was an actor playing a war hero to add to his Kennedy-like resume. John Kerry exploited band-aid purple hearts to come home early. John Kerry would likely have shot himself in the foot to get home had it not been for the accidental pin-prick he endured until such time as he could have a medic extract it with a pair of tweezers. Hero..my arse!

As it turns out, he shot himself in the foot when he claimed to be a war hero...in direct opposition to the remembrances of those who actually served our country well at the same time Johnny was compiling his war journal.

The electorate has not been watching GWB at work. They have been watching what obstinate, persistent Democrats can do to sabotage the noble efforts of a sitting Republican President...simply because he is a Republican. The most recent episode involving the "fair and open congress" as evidenced by Nancy Pelosi shutting off the lights and mics in the House of Representatives is a prime example of how the Democrats "work". Their "work" is simply to do whatever it takes to make the Republican administration look bad. They've been doing quite well at it...for years.

 

[jaap de vries]

Your basic premise is faulty. John Kerry was no war hero. John Kerry was an actor playing a war hero to add to his Kennedy-like resume. John Kerry exploited band-aid purple hearts to come home early. John Kerry would likely have shot himself in the foot to get home had it not been for the accidental pin-prick he endured until such time as he could have a medic extract it with a pair of tweezers. Hero..my arse!

As it turns out, he shot himself in the foot when he claimed to be a war hero...in direct opposition to the remembrances of those who actually served our country well at the same time Johnny was compiling his war journal.

The electorate has not been watching GWB at work. They have been watching what obstinate, persistent Democrats can do to sabotage the noble efforts of a sitting Republican President...simply because he is a Republican. The most recent episode involving the "fair and open congress" as evidenced by Nancy Pelosi shutting off the lights and mics in the House of Representatives is a prime example of how the Democrats "work". Their "work" is simply to do whatever it takes to make the Republican administration look bad. They've been doing quite well at it...for years.

Kerry received three purple hearts
1) wounded in Firefight 1968
2) Hit by RPG 1969 shrapnel still in his leg!
3) Hit by mine exploding close to his swift boat.

He also VOLUNTEERED to join the Navy

To call this "Pin-Prick" is absolutely disgusting especially compared to Bush' record (or lack thereof). The swift boat attacks are one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen in politics (and I know many republicans who agree with me) and personally I do not feel like this forum is the correct place for them.

If you are defending the conservative cause then come up with better arguments (like Russ). This is not youtube!

 

[isly ilwott]

Kerry received three purple hearts
1) wounded in Firefight 1968
2) Hit by RPG 1969 shrapnel still in his leg!
3) Hit by mine exploding close to his swift boat.

He also VOLUNTEERED to join the Navy

To call this "Pin-Prick" is absolutely disgusting especially compared to Bush' record (or lack thereof). The swift boat attacks are one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen in politics (and I know many republicans who agree with me) and personally I do not feel like this forum is the correct place for them.

If you are defending the conservative cause then come up with better arguments (like Russ). This is not youtube!

We're not talking about Bush here. We're talking about the ridiculous claim that John Kerry was a war hero. If you read the full record of his self-inflicted pin prick, you will find that the attending medical personnel did not want to report it as a wound worthy of a Purple Heart because of its extremely minor nature. It was only after Kerry's insistence that it gained him a Purple Heart.

 

[Gokul43201]

... the noble efforts of a sitting Republican President...

Funny!

 

[lisab]

...the noble efforts of a sitting Republican President...

You slay me!

 

[isly ilwott]

You slay me!

..and parrots amuse me.

I didn't say all his efforts were noble. I do see his efforts to fight terrorism as noble and worthy of high regard. I see the efforts of the Democrats to project and enable failure as treasonous.

 

[WarPhalange]

..and parrots amuse me.

You must be very amused in front of a mirror, then.

I didn't say all his efforts were noble. I do see his efforts to fight terrorism as noble and worthy of high regard. I see the efforts of the Democrats to project and enable failure as treasonous.

Project and enable failure at what? Iraq has NOTHING to do with terrorism, and that is the only thing they say failed.

Remember, with Afghanistan, the Prez had huge support from everybody. The enemy was clear, we knew what we had to do. It's just that half way through the race the Prez went "Oh look, a deer" and veered off course.

The ends do NOT justify the means, either. He can have noble causes and totally F it up, with things like spying programs, torture, cronyism, and politicizing people who should stay non-political.

 

[isly ilwott]

You must be very amused in front of a mirror, then.

My apologies. I once mistook you for a worthy debator.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Stop the personal attacks and get on subject please.

 

[seycyrus]

His "POW" reserves are running dry. He's uses that every single chance he gets

Blatant lies like this are the primary reason why Obama has a chance of losing. The continual fabrication, solely due to party bias is an insult to the intelligence of many people, who then react accordingly.

Those are just the last two I remember...

You mean *misremember*

 

[WarPhalange]

Blatant lies like this are the primary reason why Obama has a chance of losing. The continual fabrication, solely due to party bias is an insult to the intelligence of many people, who then react accordingly.

You mean *misremember*

Whoa whoa whoa hold the phone.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/08/21/mccain_spokesmans_retort_obama.html

They quote someone on McCain's staff giving an official response to the houses gaff by replying with "He lived in one house for 5 years -- in prison".

And here's him joking about it:

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/26/mccain-plays-the-pow-card-again.aspx

That's 1.

Oh hey! He doesn't like ABBA:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/08/25/sos-its-mccains-pow-card-waterloo/

That's 2, although really pathetic.

McCain didn't cheat! He's a POW!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/us/politics/18mccain.html

That's 3

Do you really want me to go on?

 

[Gokul43201]

Blatant lies like this are the primary reason why Obama has a chance of losing.

Wait a minute. Obama may lose primarily because one anonymous person may have, at best exaggerated a little bit? Have you been counting the blatant lies from the other side of the political aisle, or did you decide that those lies couldn't possibly hurt McCain? Nooo...how could McCain possibly lose if hundreds of message boards and chain emails echo with the Obama is a muslim terrorist kind of lies?

There's lots of reasons why Obama has a good chance of losing - this one however, is just nonsensical.

And here's him joking about it:

http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/26/mccain-plays-the-pow-card-again.aspx

That's 1.

Joking? He wasn't joking about it. He was being dead serious. He even says so.

You know, could I just mention to you, Jay, and a moment of seriousness. I spent five and a half years in a prison cell, without—I didn’t have a house, I didn’t have a kitchen table, I didn’t have a table, I didn’t have a chair. And I spent those five and a half years, because—not because I wanted to get a house when I got out.

q37O08IJstQ[/youtube]

 

[seycyrus]

Wait a minute. Obama may lose primarily because one anonymous person may have, at best exaggerated a little bit? ...
There's lots of reasons why Obama has a good chance of losing - this one however, is just nonsensical.

No, I stand by my contention. This election is Obama's to lose.

The way he will lose is by losing the vote of those who are wavering.

Just because they waver does not mean they are blind.

Keep on keeping on with the exagerations and the mistruths.

 

[seycyrus]

...

Do you really want me to go on?

Yeah, keep going. I want see a bunch of footage of McCain himself answering a bunch of question with your simple retort.

Not someone on his staff. Not some guy who supports him at the local bar.

 

[WarPhalange]

You're saying that his staff doesn't speak for him? You're mistaken. It's in fact the opposite.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/16342.html

Anyway, Gokul already posted a video of his "I don't know how many houses I own, but it's okay, I was a POW" schtick.

FdZjZIh-750[/youtube] His staff DO...o say that, then he should tell them to stop.

 

[WarPhalange]

d5i8rGlS5RM&feature=related[/youtube]

 

[seycyrus]

You're saying that his staff doesn't speak for him? You're mistaken. It's in fact the opposite.

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought that when you said that McCain always used the POW excuse, you meant, that yaknow... McCain himself did.

Anyway, Gokul already posted a video of his "I don't know how many houses I own, but it's okay, I was a POW" schtick.

Yeah, Gokul *already* did. I thought you were going to provide me with hordes of other examples? Or are we just going to go over that one again and again?

I also note how you are twisting it around. McCain explained *why* he or his wife owned so many houses/condos/whatever. Nowhere did he say it was *ok* because he was a POW. It's not like he said he was entitled to special priviledges because of his status.

It is apparent that you are aware that his status as a POW earns him respect in some people's eyes, and therefore wish to denigrate him on this topic.

 

[WarPhalange]

Oh, I'm sorry. I thought that when you said that McCain always used the POW excuse, you meant, that yaknow... McCain himself did.

Right. And Hitler wasn't a murderer because he himself never directly killed anybody.

If his staff doesn't speak for him, then why does he have them answer questions? He should be the one answering all the questions. If he let's them respond to questions, then that means they speak for him.

By the way, the 2nd video provides two more quotes of him using POW as an excuse. One for his healthcare plan and another from the 80's.

Yeah, Gokul *already* did. I thought you were going to provide me with hordes of other examples? Or are we just going to go over that one again and again?

There were several more in the videos I posted. I know it's hard to pay attention for a full 5 minutes when your hero is getting torn apart, but please try.

I also note how you are twisting it around. McCain explained *why* he or his wife owned so many houses/condos/whatever. Nowhere did he say it was *ok* because he was a POW. It's not like he said he was entitled to special priviledges because of his status.

No, it's called a "non-sequitur". POW has nothing to do with housing, so why did he bring it up?

It is apparent that you are aware that his status as a POW earns him respect in some people's eyes, and therefore wish to denigrate him on this topic.

It earns him respect in everybody's eyes, including mine. What makes me LOSE respect for him is when he brings it up every chance he gets. That's called whoring it out. And it's disrespectful to other POW's who aren't trying to capitalize on their misfortunes.

 

[seycyrus]

Oh, please.

The Video from Colbert. A hitpiece from MSNBC. Olbermann get's to voice his opinions without substantiation, nice.

I again note that the *hordes* of examples again centers primarily on the house question.

The guest too misrepresents McCain when he says something to the effect of "McCain used his POW as an excuse for his *inability* to remember how many houses he had"

Where did McCain do that? Where did McCain blame his forgetfullness or inability to answer on his POW experience?