News What are the Key Factors for Victory in the 2008 Presidential Election?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Evo
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the electoral significance of Hispanic and Black voters in the upcoming Obama-McCain election, highlighting that New Mexico's 5 electoral votes may not be pivotal despite its Hispanic population. Eligible Hispanic voters total approximately 17 million, while Black voters are around 24 million, compared to 151 million White voters, indicating a demographic imbalance. Concerns are raised about the potential impact of a Hispanic vice-presidential candidate for Obama, with opinions divided on whether it would significantly sway Hispanic votes. The conversation also touches on the importance of the vice-presidential picks for both candidates, especially considering McCain's age and the historical context of racial tensions surrounding Obama. Overall, the thread emphasizes the need for informed discussions about voter demographics and electoral strategies as the election approaches.

Who will win the General Election?

  • Obama by over 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 16 50.0%

  • Obama by under 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 6 18.8%

  • McCain by over 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 4 12.5%

  • McCain by under 15 Electoral Votes

    Votes: 6 18.8%
  • Total voters
    32
  • #451
If Obama wins, I may retire from Politics and just enjoy having a President whom I respect and trust.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #452
If Obama wins I hope the SS keeps a closer eye on potential assignation attempts. If he doesn't win, I hope they do the same for McCain...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSvBCBnulLs
 
  • #453
Here we go. Everyone have a good yell.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMBZDwf9dok
 
  • #454
:smile:

Warning. There's a bit of foul language.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY
 
  • #455
B. Elliott said:
If Obama wins I hope the SS keeps a closer eye on potential assignation attempts. If he doesn't win, I hope they do the same for McCain...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSvBCBnulLs

Although your point is valid, if you listen to what they say, the video is actually very positive. We see highly motivated, young black men, who are not only politically engaged, but who also determined to take responsiblity for their own lives. I would imagine that the military bit is derived from the gang mentality prevalent in poor communities.

The want to be professionals - engineers, architects, lawyers - not assassins.
 
Last edited:
  • #456
B. Elliott said:
:smile:

Warning. There's a bit of foul language.

I think O'Reilly is a raging narcissist. Not at all that dissimilar to Palin.

I thought O'Reilly was a total embarrassment for any network interviewer the other night yelling at Barney Frank and just being boorishly rude and calling Frank really rude names. It was amazing to see Frank control his visible anger at being bushwhacked in the interview and manage to rise above it and dismiss O'Reilly's rantings. Only on Fox. The journalism of desperation.
 
  • #457
Ivan Seeking said:
If Obama wins, I may retire from Politics and just enjoy having a President whom I respect and trust.

5P6UU6m3cqk[/youtube] You have g...eclare that he's as good as it will ever get?
 
  • #458
WarPhalange said:
You have got to be kidding me.

I am far past the point of kidding about the US Presidency. And yes, I think there is a good chance that Obama will be the greatest US President that I will see in my lifetime.

Of course, the problems that the next President faces are monumental. This is no time to have Joe Sixpack in the White House - that's how we got here.
 
Last edited:
  • #459
Ivan Seeking said:
And yes, I think there is a good chance that Obama will be the greatest US President that I will see in my lifetime.
Oh, I agree with you on this part. I'm just asking if you're really willing to lower your standards like that.

We've already seen Obama change his position on something (i.e. FISA bill, not exactly a minor issue) just to gain more support for his campaign. Added to that his soft stance on the Bush Administration (That he's not crying for their heads is soft. They are criminals and he will just forgive and forget?), he doesn't seem like he'd be a great president. Far from the failure of the current admin, but not great.

If you're saying Obama will be the greatest president in your life, you are just accepting the fact that future presidents will be worse and just don't care. I don't understand that mentality. I don't know how old you are, but it's like you're just giving up.

Of course, the problems that the next President faces are monumental. This is no time to have Joe Sixpack in the White House.

Joe Sixpack doesn't deserve to be in the WH, ever. If we wanted to pick some regular guy for office we could just as well go into a bar and pick a random person instead of having expensive campaigns and elections.
 
  • #460
WarPhalange said:
Oh, I agree with you on this part. I'm just asking if you're really willing to lower your standards like that.

We've already seen Obama change his position on something (i.e. FISA bill, not exactly a minor issue) just to gain more support for his campaign. Added to that his soft stance on the Bush Administration (That he's not crying for their heads is soft. They are criminals and he will just forgive and forget?), he doesn't seem like he'd be a great president. Far from the failure of the current admin, but not great.

If you're saying Obama will be the greatest president in your life, you are just accepting the fact that future presidents will be worse and just don't care. I don't understand that mentality. I don't know how old you are, but it's like you're just giving up.
Joe Sixpack doesn't deserve to be in the WH, ever. If we wanted to pick some regular guy for office we could just as well go into a bar and pick a random person instead of having expensive campaigns and elections.

I occurred to me this week that Obama must ALREADY be the greatest Senator of our time...only explanation of his meteoric rise?
 
  • #461
WarPhalange said:
We've already seen Obama change his position on something (i.e. FISA bill, not exactly a minor issue) just to gain more support for his campaign.

There are those who would consider it a good thing for a candidate to adapt his platform in order to maximize support. You could even make the case that the entire legitimacy of democratic government is based exactly on such outcomes, and that this is why our electoral system is explicitly designed to produce them, and every presidential candidate in history has behaved in that way. Sure, you don't want some spineless goof in the White House, but I don't see how a rigid ideologue would work out any better. The whole premise that any time a candidate changes a position it amounts to some fatal admission of weakness is just silly. If a change of position increases democratic support for a candidate, then you are left with only two options: either said change is indeed a good idea, or democracy is a bad idea.

BTW, I don't like the FISA shenanigans any more than the next guy, but I don't see how it would help anything for Obama to hang himself on that issue.
 
  • #462
WhoWee said:
I occurred to me this week that Obama must ALREADY be the greatest Senator of our time...only explanation of his meteoric rise?

If you want to look at meteoric, based on inconsequential ability and experience, the Republicans have that in spades with Palin. She is seemingly totally unsuited and incapable of leading the country. And if Bush hadn't set such a low threshold of capability, neither McCain nor Palin would ever be considered fit for the top of the Executive branch of the Government.
 
  • #463
Schwarzenegger to candidates: Get back to issues
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/schwarzenegger_presidential_race
SAN FRANCISCO - Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger said Tuesday that the presidential candidates should end the smear campaigns and get back to the issues.

Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama are wasting time making accusations that have nothing to do with the topics Americans want to hear about, he said.

"Look at what the presidential campaign has reduced down to: They now are accusing each other of things that have nothing to do with the economy, that have nothing to do with health care, that have nothing to do with the environment, that have nothing to do with, you know, how we deal with foreign countries," Schwarzenegger said.

The California governor made the comments during a discussion with Time magazine Managing Editor Richard Stengel at the American Magazine Conference.

The presidential race has turned negative in the last week, as McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, has raised Obama's ties to 1960s-era radical William Ayers and the Obama campaign released a video recounting McCain's involvement in the 1980s Keating Five savings and loan scandal.
. . . .
I concur with Arnold!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #464
Astronuc said:
Schwarzenegger to candidates: Get back to issues
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/schwarzenegger_presidential_race
I concur with Arnold!

I'll second that.

If only he could prevail on the others in his party.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #465
WhoWee said:
I occurred to me this week that Obama must ALREADY be the greatest Senator of our time...only explanation of his meteoric rise?
Can we agree that he is the only senator that made a bold, and prophetically wise pronouncement on our biggest engagement of this decade - the Iraq War? (at around the same time that McCain was stoking the Bush administration propaganda by pointing to Iraq as the cause of the anthrax attacks)
 
  • #466
Gokul43201 said:
Can we agree that he is the only senator that made a bold, and prophetically wise pronouncement on our biggest engagement of this decade - the Iraq War? (at around the same time that McCain was stoking the Bush administration propaganda by pointing to Iraq as the cause of the anthrax attacks)

Only if we can agree that his plan for health care will put many small businesses (companies with annual revenues of less than $500,000) into danger of bankruptcy with mandated requirements. Companies of this size have already seen profits eroded by increases in minimum wages, increased utility costs (some rates have doubled in the past 3 years), decreases in revenues due to shrinking consumer purchases, and increased COGS due to rising fuel (delivery) expenses. I'm personally affiliated with a major health insurance company. Due to current economic conditions...insurance rates have increased (across the board) drastically over the past few days. In preparation of this posting, I ran a quote sample for a 70/30 $3,500 deductible, $4,000 max out of pocket - $5,000,000/$1,000,000 comprehensive medical plan with preventative rider/accident/emergency/prescription for a family of 4 in reasonable health...the cost is $1,100 per month. Small business ($500,000 revenues) owners earning $25,000 to $50,000 per year personally can not afford to purchase health insurance for their employees...it is not realistic. To further analyze, an average business of this size may have 2 to 4 full time employees. Assuming the employees DON'T have families of 4...only 2...the average cost = approx $5,000 per employee. A 50% employer contribution = $5,000 to $10,000 per year additional out of pocket cost to the business owner. Health care reform is necessary...but, leading with mandated coverage is not the way to fix the system.
 
  • #467
WhoWee said:
Only if we can agree that his plan for health care will put many small businesses (companies with annual revenues of less than $500,000) into danger of bankruptcy with mandated requirements.
I will respond after you tell me what relevance this has to his "meteoric rise" in the senate?
 
  • #468
Gokul43201 said:
I will respond after you tell me what relevance this has to his "meteoric rise" in the senate?

I decided to just agree with you on your point...it probably didn't hurt him. I don't think it qualifies him to be President...but it DID make him stand out at that moment in history...good point!

Then, I segued into a subject that concerns me...hoped you would take a serious look.
 
  • #469
WhoWee said:
I decided to just agree with you on your point...

Then, I segued into a subject that concerns me...hoped you would take a serious look.

It looked like your agreement was contingent upon a further discussion of another point:
WhoWee said:
Only if we can agree ...

Health care reform is necessary...but, leading with mandated coverage is not the way to fix the system.
To my knowledge, the Obama plan for small business does not outright mandate coverage for employees. It provides a few alternative options.

They are all covered here: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/business/documents/mclooneblog/FactSheetSmallBusinessFinal.pdf

There's more in this WSJ op ed: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122152292213639569.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Given the current inefficiencies in our system, the impact of the Obama plan will be profound. Besides the $2,500 savings in medical costs for the typical family, according to our research annual business-sector costs will fall by about $140 billion. Our figures suggest that decreasing employer costs by this amount will result in the expansion of employer-provided health insurance to 10 million previously uninsured people.
 
  • #470


A big gain for Obama over the last week, on both markets, :

Market Update:
Code: 
               INTRADE       IOWA ELECTRONIC MARKET

           Obama    McCain      Dem     Rep
Jun 26     $64.1    $32.4      0.622   0.378
Jul 11     $65.0    $31.2      0.643   0.358
Jul 26     $63.2    $32.2      0.688   0.355
Aug 11     $59.9    $37.2      0.621   0.377
Aug 21     $59.0    $38.7      0.607   0.394
Sep 01     $61.1    $39.2      0.602   0.395
Sep 11     $49.0    $49.9      0.540   0.462
Sep 21     $51.3    $47.7      0.601   0.392
Oct 01     $64.8    $34.6      0.651   0.322
Oct 08     $73.0    $26.5      0.785   0.243
 
  • #471
I just finished watching a very well received Obama speech in Indiana. McCain should be very worried.

Meanwhile McCain is puttering around in Pennsylvania trolling for electoral votes that he can't win and it looks like Obama is making gains in states that McCain took for granted.

I watched it on Fox and it was a bit surreal because the Fox ticker was at times trying to tie Obama to Acorn and listing all of the claimed Acorn voter fraud, while Obama was absolutely blasting McCain flat and noting his "new" mortgage policy was already enacted into law with the 700B package.

Admittedly it was in Indianapolis, but 21K enthusiastic people is a still pretty good showing.
 
  • #472
Originally Posted by BobG
If Obama wins, I think you could see him exercise some real bipartisanship and place a Republican or two in his cabinet.

If Obama wins, I'll bet Hagel is on the really short list for Secretary of Defense.

If Obama wins,I hope and plead with him to ask Colin Powell to accept as Sec. of Defense!(and he has foreign policy expertise)
 
  • #474
Amp1 said:
If Obama wins,I hope and plead with him to ask Colin Powell to accept as Sec. of Defense!(and he has foreign policy expertise)
After Powell lied for Bush to get us into the Iraq War, I think we've had enough of his "help" and expertise.
 
  • #475
Ivan Seeking said:
I am far past the point of kidding about the US Presidency. And yes, I think there is a good chance that Obama will be the greatest US President that I will see in my lifetime.

Of course, the problems that the next President faces are monumental. This is no time to have Joe Sixpack in the White House - that's how we got here.

If the history of the last few decades are any guide, the economy will turn around within the next year and Obama's chances for re-election should be very good.

On the other hand, if the government bailouts occurring world wide don't work and if civil war erupts anew in Iraq, Obama could look worse than Jimmy Carter.

I agree the problems facing the next President are monumental ... and very unpredictable in how they'll turn out.
 
  • #476
Whowee said:
...Only if we can agree that his plan for health care will put many small businesses (companies with annual revenues of less than $500,000) into danger of bankruptcy with mandated requirements...

Obama - I'm not sure of actual numbers - stated that a majority of small firms will fall BELOW the $250,000 bar. Actually, a business with a half million or more in profits isn't exactly small, more like mid-sized to large hopeing for conglomorate. Also, since more than 80% in working people earn less than $250,000 it would mean a tax cut targeted in the correct manner. Like Obama said to McCain "...we would be ok..."- meaning their life style would not be hurt where they could notice unlike the people under the poverty line, in the lower middle class, mid-middle class, even some upper middle class; who suffer more because its a larger piece of their income they lose supporting the tax cuts and public welfare for the wealthy and ultra-wealthy, corporations and individuals.
 
  • #477
Turbo-1, I believe Bush/Cheney misinformed Powell, directed him to suppoort their claim and generally left him out of the loop when they realized he was not sopping up their deception and wasn't in agreement with them on it. I think he may have tried to make the best out of a bad situation to possibly blunt the turmoil I'm sure he saw comming.
 
  • #478
Amp1 said:
Turbo-1, I believe Bush/Cheney misinformed Powell, directed him to suppoort their claim and generally left him out of the loop when they realized he was not sopping up their deception and wasn't in agreement with them on it. I think he may have tried to make the best out of a bad situation to possibly blunt the turmoil I'm sure he saw comming.
Based on what I've read, I do believe Powell was blind-sided. He went to the UN with CIA Director George Tenet. If Powell knew he was providing false or questionable information, he definitely does not deserve a second chance. However, if he was kept in the dark and misled, then he should be considered for a role in the next administration at the discretion of the administration.
 
  • #479
Hannity's fake news "report" that tried to link Obama to all manner of radicals came under fire for basing the report so heavily on material supplied by an anti-semite.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64YpAarzzlQ

I watched the report and thought it worthy of Reni Riefenstahl, more so than as anything that was particularly news worthy. And it was of some relief to see the bald Fox propaganda machine exposed, at least for the record. (Not that it will make a difference to any of their viewers.)

Huffington and Salon both picked up on the story today:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/08/robert-gibbs-confronts-ha_n_132842.html
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/10/08/fox_news/
 
  • #480
Astronuc said:
Based on what I've read, I do believe Powell was blind-sided. He went to the UN with CIA Director George Tenet. If Powell knew he was providing false or questionable information, he definitely does not deserve a second chance. However, if he was kept in the dark and misled, then he should be considered for a role in the next administration at the discretion of the administration.

As I recall Powell was pretty furious, though the good soldier he never expressed it publicly. But I think this is why he left.
 

Similar threads

News Does Your Vote Really Matter in Presidential Elections?
  • · Replies 139 ·
5
Replies
139
Views
16K
News Was the 2008 election a repudiation of Bush and the Republican Party?
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
4K
News What were the top issues in the 2008 presidential election?
  • · Replies 82 ·
3
Replies
82
Views
20K
  • Poll Poll
News What Will the Voter Turnout Be in the Upcoming US Presidential Election?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
News Who will win the popular vote and by what margin?
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
6K