News Will Palin's VP Debate Performance Impact McCain's Campaign?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around John McCain's selection of Sarah Palin as his vice presidential candidate in the 2008 election. Participants express mixed reactions to her nomination, noting her limited experience as the governor of Alaska and questioning whether her gender will attract disenchanted Hillary Clinton supporters. There is speculation about Palin's appeal to female voters and potential strategies to counter Barack Obama’s campaign. Concerns are raised about her qualifications and the implications of having a less experienced candidate on the ticket, especially given McCain's age and health issues. The conversation also touches on the broader themes of gender in politics, the effectiveness of her candidacy in swaying voters, and the potential for her to energize conservative bases. Overall, the selection is viewed as a strategic move, but opinions vary on its effectiveness and implications for the election.
  • #151
BobG said:
Hillary Clinton is going to have to play a key role in the Obama campaign and go on a serious attack against Palin.

Will she do it? There's some risk to her own political career if she attacks too hard.
The Clintons take offense easily, and they hold a grudge. The recent revelation the Palin couldn't bring herself to support Clinton because of Clinton's "whining" is not going to endear the two. If anything can bring Clinton back into play, it's retribution for that slight.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #152
BobG said:
Actually, the counter to Palin on the ticket is pretty straight forward.

Hillary Clinton is going to have to play a key role in the Obama campaign and go on a serious attack against Palin.

Will she do it? There's some risk to her own political career if she attacks too hard.

If they go after each other too viciously it's going to be viewed as a "catfight". That's just going to be bad for everybody.
 
  • #153
One question for everybody to ponder. If McCain had chosen a young man with no experience in federal government and less than 2 years experience as a governor of a thinly-populated state as his running mate, what would people think of that? Would they be saying "great choice, John"? I think not.

It seems to me that the driving "qualification" of Palin is her gender, and that amounts to pandering on the part of the McCain campaign. Do they think that Hil-lovers will vote for McCain just because there's a (creationist/evangelical/pro-life/pro gun-rights) woman on the ticket? Don't at least some of Clinton's die-hards believe that experience is important? They seemed to make that case whenever they blustered about Obama being inexperienced and Clinton being "ready on day one". One of those ladies (a neighbor in her late 60's) is still talking about Obama "stealing" Clinton's nomination, though I haven't spoken to her since McCain chose Palin.
 
  • #154
Harry S. Truman stepped up to the plate and made a major decision about a bomb, that just a week or two earlier he had no knowledge of, he was virtually unknown, and had a long list of failed enterprises, and yes maybe a little more exposure to battle, WWI.
Overall I think he was one of our better presidents.

I don't see much yet, that says she can't meet the challenge if the needs arise.

Besides she is just so good looking:!)
 
  • #155
turbo-1 said:
One question for everybody to ponder. If McCain had chosen a young man with no experience in federal government and less than 2 years experience as a governor of a thinly-populated state as his running mate, what would people think of that? Would they be saying "great choice, John"? I think not.

It seems to me that the driving "qualification" of Palin is her gender, and that amounts to pandering on the part of the McCain campaign. Do they think that Hil-lovers will vote for McCain just because there's a (creationist/evangelical/pro-life/pro gun-rights) woman on the ticket? Don't at least some of Clinton's die-hards believe that experience is important? They seemed to make that case whenever they blustered about Obama being inexperienced and Clinton being "ready on day one". One of those ladies (a neighbor in her late 60's) is still talking about Obama "stealing" Clinton's nomination, though I haven't spoken to her since McCain chose Palin.

Oh, I think the pandering is beyond obvious.

Call me crazy, but I was sensing some sentiment for a while that if you weren't supporting Obama, you were maybe just a little bit racist. So, now you get a choice: you can either be a racist or a sexist. :smile:
 
  • #156
Her religious beliefs are what is scary to me. I personally do not want a Vice-President, much less a President that speaks in tongues.
 
  • #157
Evo said:
Her religious beliefs are what is scary to me. I personally do not want a Vice-President, much less a President that speaks in tongues.

I'm cool with that. But snake-handling is where I draw the line.
 
  • #158
Evo said:
From what I've heard, it was a surprise to her too! :-p

Apparently McCain bypassed the normal procedure of investigating her.
He used Wikipedia?
 
  • #159
BobG said:
Hillary Clinton is going to have to play a key role in the Obama campaign and go on a serious attack against Palin.

Will she do it? There's some risk to her own political career if she attacks too hard.

As far as Palin goes, I think she is vulnerable from simple exposure. For her more will surely be less. It may not need Hilary as a counterbalance at all. She is apparently not a deep thinker with her faith based science beliefs and I'd say that the more she is called upon to answer the more two dimensional and clueless that she will be seen. One Phil Graham moment from her and their chances will be incinerated to burnt marshmallow.

Unfortunately I think whatever she does the fundamentalist base will continue to think she is just dandy.
 
  • #160
Math Is Hard said:
Oh, I think the pandering is beyond obvious.

Call me crazy, but I was sensing some sentiment for a while that if you weren't supporting Obama, you were maybe just a little bit racist. So, now you get a choice: you can either be a racist or a sexist. :smile:

Unfortunately I think there will be racial fallout in the numbers. And it's not that any that may be against him are racist, but I am certain there will be an element of that in some parts of the country, and some will latch on to some reason other than racism not to vote for him. I think it's regrettable.

As to Palin though I think her fundamentalist views will make it easy not to support her without any reference to sexism.
 
  • #161
Evo said:
I wish there was some kind of medal I could give you. But then people that don't like me would turn on you, so maybe you're better off if I ignore you. :wink:
No one can turn on Bob. He's unturnonable! :biggrin:
 
  • #162
Gokul43201 said:
No one can turn on Bob. He's unturnonable! :biggrin:

omg :smile:
 
  • #163
LowlyPion said:
As to Palin though I think her fundamentalist views will make it easy not to support her without any reference to sexism.
We know that Obama has been going to church regularly for at least 20 years yet no one here is condemning that.

As an atheist, I find it strange that people are so quick to condemn the religious right while making excuses for the religious left.:rolleyes: At least, if I had to sit through a sermon, I get the feeling I would rather sit through one at Palin's church than at Obama's.
 
  • #164
Cyrus said:
She is trying out for a job. Why shouldn't they be weighted?

At least McCain went to the Naval Academy and was a Naval Aviator. The Naval Academy isn't for idiots.

Even if you want to argue McCain got there because of his father (which I won't argue), at least he was exposed to people of a very high caliber and teachers that demanded much from him.

Honestly, school of Journalism from Idaho?....What award winning journalists ever came out of that place?

Ben Franklin never went to any ivy league school(heck he never finished elementary school) and he is considered one of the more knowledgeable founding fathers of the constitution. He was also a polymath. Don't think just because a political figure never attended an ivy league school , that they will not make a good president. Dubya's ivy league education didn't helped make Bush a good president.
 
  • #165
Evo said:
You hear all this talk about how Palin will help get the women's vote. I seriously doubt that. Who are these people that seem to think women are mindless sheeples? I'm personally appalled by her. She follows a religious belief of keeping women in their place as set forth in the bible and would take away a woman's right to choose (abortion). I believe that it should be "a woman's right to choose", it's not that a woman would be forced to have an abortion, she doesn't even believe that women should have a choice. She's what I would call a "throwback".

I not so sure about women, but I know Obama received a large chunk of the black vote(95 %) , just because he is half black(and a democrat). And when Romney was running for the republican nomination, he won the Utah primaries because of the large Mormon population; Same goes for Huckabee when he garnered a large portion of the evangelical vote. Whether we like to admit it or not , the background(whether it be because of the persons racial, religious or any other affliation) of a presidential candidate does have an impact over the way a person will vote. That is why it is soo hard for an atheist or non-religious person to run for president since 70 % of americans say they are religious.
 
  • #166
Benzoate said:
I not so sure about women, but I know Obama received a large chunk of the black vote(95 %) , just because he is half black(and a democrat). And when Romney was running for the republican nomination, he won the Utah primaries because of the large Mormon population; Same goes for Huckabee when he garnered a large portion of the evangelical vote. Whether we like to admit it or not , the background(whether it be because of the persons racial, religious or any other affliation) of a presidential candidate does have an impact over the way a person will vote. That is why it is soo hard for an atheist or non-religious person to run for president since 70 % of americans say they are religious.

I thought it was well over 70%...?
 
  • #167
grant9076 said:
We know that Obama has been going to church regularly for at least 20 years yet no one here is condemning that.
And you know this from reading how many threads?

But in any case, I have no idea how "regularly" he has been going, nor do I what you mean when you use that word. In any case, over a third of all Americans attend church at least once a month and over half attend at least a few times a year.

Anyway, there's a difference between attending church and being a proponent of creationism.

As an atheist, I find it strange that people are so quick to condemn the religious right while making excuses for the religious left.:rolleyes:
As people that work in science, we are quick to condemn creationists and other such crackpots.

At least, if I had to sit through a sermon, I get the feeling I would rather sit through one at Palin's church than at Obama's.

How much do you know about Palin's Church? What if you found out it followed say, a Dominionist theology?

lisab said:
I thought it was well over 70%...?
About 75% attend church and nearly 80% believe in a God.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=408
 
  • #168
Mississippi's Republican governor will not attend the RNC with a possible cat5 hurricane bearing down on his state, but he has had the foresight to invite McCain and Palin down for a briefing on Sunday, so they can look presidential and concerned. With all the stuff that the local authorities may have to deal with, what is the point of inviting VIPs and tying up resources like state and local police, dispatchers, etc who will have to provide escort services, security details, etc? Won't Mississippi's police have their hands full with people who are evacuating and/or trying to secure their properties?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080831/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_mccain_gustav;_ylt=ArmSv45qu_.yTYGAg43_Hras0NUE
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #169
turbo-1 said:
With all the stuff that the local authorities may have to deal with, what is the point of inviting VIPs and tying up resources like state and local police, dispatchers, etc who will have to provide escort services, security details, etc? Won't Mississippi's police have their hands full with people who are evacuating and/or trying to secure their properties?

Except that Haley Barbour is a good soldier in the Republican party. These kinds of photo ops are grist for the Rove news clip mill. As the former head of the RNC he knows who butters his bread.

So what if people are inconvenienced? They have conservatives to get elected.
 
  • #170
LowlyPion said:
Except that Haley Barbour is a good soldier in the Republican party. These kinds of photo ops are grist for the Rove news clip mill. As the former head of the RNC he knows who butters his bread.

So what if people are inconvenienced? They have conservatives to get elected.
I hope Jackson is top-heavy in cops, dispatchers, and other public-safety personnel, because when people with SS protection roll into town, they place a strain on such services even when everything is going hunky-dory. Gustav may not play nice with Mississippi, and Monday-morning quarterbacking by local officials who felt overwhelmed by a high-profile VIP visit on top of possible mandatory evacuations of coastal areas, pre-positioning medical resources, food, water, ice, etc in advance of a storm... er, well, let's say that those people who work around the clock to provide public safety services in potential emergencies may not be real charitable about the McCain/Palin visit after the fact, especially if it placed undue strains on their resources. McCain should reconsider this trip so this doesn't blow up in his face.
 
  • #171
lisab said:
I thought it was well over 70%...?

I thought so too. But according to a survey taken , 30 % of the people surveyed say they don't go to church or have any religious belief they practice. I guess the remaining 30 % would be composed of athiests , people apathetic to religion, and people who identified themselves as "spiritual"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/24/us/24religion.html?hp
 
  • #172
grant9076 said:
As an atheist, I find it strange that people are so quick to condemn the religious right while making excuses for the religious left.

The difference of course is that Obama is not apparently OK with allowing Intelligent Design discussions to creep into public education. Nor is he against a woman's right to decide about carrying a baby to term, nor against stem cell research. Nor against gay marriages.

I'm all for letting people believe whatever they want about Creation and conception. I am not alright however with having such theories and extreme moral judgments bleed into mainstream social policy by fiat. I take it as a fundamental of the US system that the many should be free of the tyranny of the few and the few should be free of the tyranny of the many. What they do within their sects is my choice to join or ignore. Their attempts to impose their beliefs on me is intolerable.

grant9076 said:
At least, if I had to sit through a sermon, I get the feeling I would rather sit through one at Palin's church than at Obama's.

I will remain pretty skeptical of this assertion if you are an atheist. I imagine that if you were, you would keep that a secret there in Wasilla, lest an exorcism ensue.
 
  • #173
When in Juneau Palin attends the Juneau Christian Center. For non church goers the trend has been to a music format that attracts the younger generation. Song books are out, big screen LCD's which display the words are in.

Praise songs, such as the one in the link repeat the same verse of a song over and over.



The link is from a Christmas service at Juneau Christian Center. The lady in the foreground with her hands in the air is not directing the music.

Palin's home church is Curch On The Rock in Wasilla.

http://churchontherockak.org/video/index.html

They seem to be pretty informal which is also a trend.

Just to keep peace in the family I attend Church occasionally with my wife at a Southern Baptist Church that has over six thousand members.

For old geezers like me they even have ear plugs available because the music at the Baptist church is deafening. It is like this link only worse.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #174
Evo said:
Here is the problem I have with her, and it seems perhaps the reason she was chosen?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/cvn_palin_evangelicals
Ok, but if McCain's calculus is that he's lost already lost your particular demographic (and he's right? I believe you said you're voting Obama) then he's correct to target evangelicals with his VP selection - just from a political standpoint.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #175
If they really want to get the conservative vote, they should release pics of Palin cooking and cleaning in an apron.
 
  • #176
Evo said:
You hear all this talk about how Palin will help get the women's vote.

I don't think women vote as a monolithic entity, and I don't think anyone serious thinks so either. (I'll ignore the people whose lives revolve around the political blogs and/or talk radio/Air America). There is no such thing as "the women's vote".

Back in the days when Sen. McCain was being trounced in the polls by "probably Sen. Obama", I went through the exercise of calculating how many PUMAs would really need to throw their support over to McCain to change the outcome, and the answer was 6% of Sen. Clinton's supporters. I wouldn't speculate on whether 6% would or would not do this - that's just the number that popped out. I'm too lazy to recalculate the number today, but as McCain has been closing the gap, it's got to be smaller.

Tactically, I think this was about the best choice that McCain could have made. I think the choice of Sen. Biden was poor - picking someone with 35 years in the senate undermined the message of change, and when the senator with the most liberal voting record chooses the senator with the third most liberal voting record, it undermines the message of post-partisianship. Contrast this with Governor Palin, who is able to energize the social conservatives without irritating the moderates and swing voters (this is where her lack of seniority serves as an advantage). McCain's choice is newsworthy, and managed to wipe the Democrats off the front page as soon as the convention was over. It reinforces the idea of "McCain as maverick" which let's him nibble at Obama's own message of change. The immediate and inevitable attacks from the left saying "two years of executive experience is insufficient qualifications for the #2 spot" beg the question "what about two years of federal legislative experience and zero of executive for the #1 spot?" (When you circle the wagons, it helps to shoot out, not in!)

The people who dislike this decision the most are the people who wouldn't vote for McCain anyway. So from McCain's perspective, it doesn't matter. Selecting a candidate who can improve the ticket's standing among swing voters and at the same time energize the base was brilliant - I would argue the best move McCain has made in the campaign yet.

Note that in this message I deliberately avoided saying whether I like her or not.
 
  • #177
I don't think women vote as a monolithic entity, and I don't think anyone serious thinks so either. (I'll ignore the people whose lives revolve around the political blogs and/or talk radio/Air America). There is no such thing as "the women's vote".
I don't think there is a monolithic voting entity of any kind, particularly on the national or state-wide levels. Certainly the 'media' like to use terms like 'black' vote, or 'womens' vote, or red states vs blue states. It's rather unfortunate in a nation which prides itself on individuality.

Perhaps it's a reflection of a two party system, well there are others like Libertarian, Independent, Green, . . . , but the system is dominated by two parties, as opposed to mutliple parties as is the case in many other countries.

Many individuals do vote for simple reasons. I've mentioned it before, that I encountered a woman who voted for GW because he was better looking than Kerry. She also mentioned, she did not understand the issues, nor was she inclined to expend any effort to understand the issues, e.g. tax policy, international relations, etc.

There is a big difference between those who keep their religiosity personal and those who are compelled to impose their religiosity on others or advertise it conspicuously. The latter is inclined to use the government to impose their particular religious ideology on the mass population, e.g. by introducing or promoting prayer in school, or creationism/ID in science curricula, or using public funds to financial support particular religious groups and exclude others, . . . .
 
  • #178
Gokul43201 said:
Evo said:
But then people that don't like me would turn on you, so maybe you're better off if I ignore you.

No one can turn on Bob. He's unturnonable! :biggrin:

I think Evo intended another context: for others to be turnonbobable
 
Last edited:
  • #179
It's an ill wind that blows no good.

Gustav has apparently provided a perfect opportunity to keep Bush away from the convention in Minneapolis. PR moment to be avoided - Bush on stage with McCain. Hide Bush in a bunker where people can't see how little he is actually doing and let the stage be McCain's.
 
  • #180
LowlyPion said:
It's an ill wind that blows no good.

Gustav has apparently provided a perfect opportunity to keep Bush away from the convention in Minneapolis. PR moment to be avoided - Bush on stage with McCain. Hide Bush in a bunker where people can't see how little he is actually doing and let the stage be McCain's.
Divine intervention perhaps? :smile: :rolleyes:
 
  • #181
Astronuc said:
Divine intervention perhaps? :smile: :rolleyes:

Master puppeteer Rove must thrilled.

Meanwhile my best tip for the day - fill up the gas tank before the oil and gas traders get into work on Tuesday.
 
  • #182
Now it would be interesting if the remnants of Gustav move up the Mississippi River Valley to Minneapolis - St. Paul.
 
  • #183
The latest news is that Cheney won't go to the convention either ... because of course he is so vital to emergency planning - like Bush is? (Cheney's job is to move Bush's mouth maybe?)

Now it seems they don't want Bush interfering with recovery efforts either, where will he go?

Perhaps with nothing for Bush to do, he can be at the convention to let his popularity rub off on candidate McCain after all?
 
  • #184
  • #185
Does anyone find McCain's claim- that Palin is more qualified than Obama - disturbing? There seems to be a some insinuations here, for one it's totally disregarding.
 
  • #186
GCT said:
Does anyone find McCain's claim- that Palin is more qualified than Obama - disturbing? There seems to be a some insinuations here, for one it's totally disregarding.
Lindsey Graham said much the same on ABC's This Week. Just the slur with no justification, aside from his assertions that Obama "got it wrong on Iraq" and was willing to negotiate with Ahmadinejad. Of course there was no honest explanation that if the US wanted to negotiate with Iran, they would be negotiating with representatives of the Supreme Ayatollah, who actually holds the power in Iran. Fear-mongering and lies from one end to the other. If Graham can explain how Palin is actually more experienced and better-suited than Obama, he wasn't letting on.

In my opinion, Obama got it right on Iraq right from the beginning, and his willingness to negotiate with Iran instead of bombing them as a first resort (after pretend-negotiations and bluster) is a sign of maturity and experience. We haven't had that in the White house for the last 8 years.
 
  • #187
turbo-1 said:
Lindsey Graham said much the same on ABC's This Week.
Graham, Giuliani, the campaign...they've all got the same cue card. And they seem to have got it from Limbaugh.

TpvoGd75Kxg[/youtube]
 
  • #188
Well, it's not working on the college crowd, at least not here. The Evo Child was foaming at the mouth today about Palin. She will probably mobilize the entire campus to come out in force to vote against McCain/Palin, and she's just the sort that could do it. Katrina was nothing compared to Hurricane Evo Child. I had to listen to a long lecture about Palin today. I'm afraid my youngest daughter has become a political activist. :bugeye:
 
  • #189
Evo said:
Well, it's not working on the college crowd, at least not here. The Evo Child was foaming at the mouth today about Palin. She will probably mobilize the entire campus to come out in force to vote against McCain/Palin, and she's just the sort that could do it. Katrina was nothing compared to Hurricane Evo Child. I had to listen to a long lecture about Palin today. I'm afraid my youngest daughter has become a political activist. :bugeye:
Give her a hug for me, Evo, and remind her that if the Democrats start pulling the same kind of crap after they've been in power for a while, we'll need her to help us keep them honest. Sheep get tyranny, thoughtful people can fight that.
 
  • #190
Evo said:
Well, it's not working on the college crowd, at least not here. The Evo Child was foaming at the mouth today about Palin. She will probably mobilize the entire campus to come out in force to vote against McCain/Palin, and she's just the sort that could do it. Katrina was nothing compared to Hurricane Evo Child. I had to listen to a long lecture about Palin today. I'm afraid my youngest daughter has become a political activist. :bugeye:

I don't think Palin/Cain use facebook.

Obama's biggest group has ~645,604 members (he's even on imeem :eek:)
Mc Cain less than 500
 
  • #191
Is anybody else expecting an all out slaughter this November? It is my understanding that polls are taken mostly from older people and nobody is really accounting for all the new young voters that Obama has attracted.
 
  • #192
I see a John McCain page on facebook with 250,225 "supporters".
 
  • #193
Math Is Hard said:
I see a John McCain page on facebook with 250,225 "supporters".

oops, I was using "Mc Cain"
 
  • #194
WarPhalange said:
Is anybody else expecting an all out slaughter this November? It is my understanding that polls are taken mostly from older people and nobody is really accounting for all the new young voters that Obama has attracted.
Do not underestimate the effects of 2 more months the Rove attack-machine, and do not forget that the Republicans have been honing voter-suppression techniques for longer than that and will surely bring out new ones this time around. They still have some effective tools with which to try to force a Republican win regardless of the intent of the voters.

In 2000 cops were out heavily in minority neighborhoods of Florida, and people with names similar to those of felons were not allowed to vote unless they proved that they were not felons, and even then they were only allowed to file "provisional ballots" which are so under-counted as to be not much better than useless. In 2004, whites in Ohio in affluent neighborhoods had to wait little if at all to vote, while minorities in poorer neighborhoods often had to wait in lines for many hours. Even if the electronically-tallied votes were not tampered with, the suppression resulting from voters having to choose between staying to vote, going home to be home for their kids after school, voter having to leave the line to get to work, etc, all could have and probably did affect the outcome of the 2004 election in that pivotal state. Also in 2004, Republicans used "caging lists" primarily against deployed military personnel. They sent letters to soldiers' homes by a method that required a signature of the recipient and when the deployed serviceperson ws unable to sign and the letter was returned, they submitted those letters to the registrars of their states, demanding that the soldiers' names be removed from the polls because they were not living at their address of record.
 
Last edited:
  • #195
I'm still surprised nobody has been put to death for those things. That's the only way these "elites" will understand, when they realize the common man has the power to take his *** to jail or worse.

Right now they're not even getting a slap on the wrist.
 
  • #196
I think they have decided that San Antonio is safe enough for Bush to protect through the bad weather.

Though for the life of me I can't imagine why he couldn't mismanage things from Minneapolis just as well as from San Antonio.
 
  • #197
WarPhalange said:
Is anybody else expecting an all out slaughter this November? It is my understanding that polls are taken mostly from older people and nobody is really accounting for all the new young voters that Obama has attracted.
You don't realize what a well oiled machine the Evagelicals are. Now they are fighting to get one of their own (Palin) elected. They will stop at nothing, I'm not kidding, I've seen the levels they will go to first hand.

Hopefully the mainstream religious people will be alarmed by the fact that Palin is Pentecostal.
 
  • #198
Math Is Hard said:
I see a John McCain page on facebook with 250,225 "supporters".

That's right. McCain's has a shave over 250,000 supporters on facebook. Obama has a shave under 1.5 million supporters on facebook.
 
  • #199
Evo said:
You don't realize what a well oiled machine the Evagelicals are. Now they are fighting to get one of their own (Palin) elected. They will stop at nothing, I'm not kidding, I've seen the levels they will go to first hand.
WarPhalange, I didn't want to get into this because of the repercussions that might come from steering a political discussion into religious waters, but since Evo is OK with it:

The Evangelicals are extremely efficient. Their leaders can produce almost monolithic blocs of voters if they want, and if they are willing to put in a little pulpit time. They don't have to say "vote for Palin" from the pulpit, and if they did so, they would almost certainly face challenges to their tax-exempt status. They are not that stupid. All they have to do is stop just short of asking for votes and instead point out just how faithful and Christian Palin is, and preach about how she values life (carrying a Down Syndrome baby at age 44 certainly qualifies) and how she shares the values of the Evangelical congregation being preached to. It's not going to take much to swing their congregations, even though the Republicans have courted Evangelicals in every modern election, and then dumped them like an unattractive blind date shortly after each election.
 
  • #200
Evo said:
But then people that don't like me would turn on you, so maybe you're better off if I ignore you. :wink:

Gokul43201 said:
No one can turn on Bob. He's unturnonable! :biggrin:

Andre said:
I think Evo intended another context: for others to be turnonbobable

I think this evolution of terminology has become discombobulated.

Beside, the PF sisterhood can turn Bob on anytime.
 

Similar threads

News Can Wiki Edits Predict Romney's VP Choice?
4
Replies
153
Views
18K
News Palin pick an insult to our intelligence
21
Replies
1K
Views
94K
Is Sarah Palin a Hypocrite on Teen Pregnancy Support?
Replies
17
Views
7K
News McCain is Aware of and Concerned About the Hope of Americans
Replies
45
Views
5K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
2
Replies
65
Views
10K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top