sp0rsk said:That award still belongs to this man:
I wonder if someone replaced his regular speech on the teleprompter with the Independence Day speech....would folks realize it's not the movie?
sp0rsk said:That award still belongs to this man:
sp0rsk said:That award still belongs to this man:
sp0rsk said:I propose we vote on a bill that would prevent APF and Mckmas from ever talking to each other.
ralexand said:I do hope that ad gets more coverage to demonstrate what shit head those guys are.
Yeah I've noticed this the past number of months, although I'm sure it's nothing new. Free airtime for political commercials. Apparently they're news-worthy. Our media is pathetic.Tamanon said:I hope it gets no coverage. The only reason it was even created was to get on the news. Political advertising has taken a big turn with the advent of the 24/7 news networks. No longer do you need to actually buy ads to get the message out, just release the ad to the networks and it'll be pontificated on.
It isn't. Remember the little girl pulling daisy petals before a nuclear countdown? That only aired ONCE.demon said:Yeah I've noticed this the past number of months, although I'm sure it's nothing new.
? as that quote says, the Wright story only demonstrates that coverage of Obama has not been entirely positive, not that media coverage of him has not been overall positive. There's a difference between the actual numbers on tone, and the numbers on big stories have been "frustrating" for Obama (likely because 1. he'd gotten enormously positive coverage, on balance, up to that point; 2. because it had two "legs;" 3. Obama is a big story who gets more coverage overall). This does not even go into whether or not all coverage of Obama that also discussed Wright was negative--for example, Obama's speech on race, for which the Wright comments were a catalyst, was a positive and resonated positively with voters.Byakuya769 said:.. Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. Give it up mck, there's no hope for this one.
APF said:? as that quote says, the Wright story only demonstrates that coverage of Obama has not been entirely positive, not that media coverage of him has not been overall positive. There's a difference between the actual numbers on tone, and the numbers on big stories have been "frustrating" for Obama (likely because 1. he'd gotten enormously positive coverage, on balance, up to that point; 2. because it had two "legs;" 3. Obama is a big story who gets more coverage overall). This does not even go into whether or not all coverage of Obama that also discussed Wright was negative--for example, Obama's speech on race, for which the Wright comments were a catalyst, was a positive and resonated positively with voters.
Byakuya769 said:.. Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. Give it up mck, there's no hope for this one.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/cnn-poll-suggests-trouble-for-obama-but.htmlDartastic said:I'm sure this is old, but this really, genuinely scares me.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/24/election.2008.poll/index.html
sp0rsk said:That award still belongs to this man:
Tyrone Slothrop said:the electoral college projections are still in the democrats favor and that's all that matters, i guess. and its too early to look at polls blah blah ect
what i am worried about is the 9/11 anniversary is coming up. and that with a wildcard VP announcement - namely a woman candidate - could really fuck things up.
Krowley said:the buzz in the news leading into this convention is starting to make me think it will be a mixed bag for Obama. There is going to be a lot of drama involving the Clintons... Even if everybody behaves, the media will scrutinize every tiny thing and build mountains out of molehills. I honestly think the Clinton's would like to see him lose. If they can find any way to undermine him without being too upfront about it, they'll probably do it.
APF said:I don't follow your point: even though the biggest story of the campaign was re: something Obama didn't want to discuss, he still got extremely positive coverage overall, which means that if this one story didn't occur he'd get 100% positive coverage rather than 70%? And this points to Obama getting more negative coverage than anyone else even though you just showed he didn't--that McCain did?
GhaleonEB said:There are protesters and hecklers at every national convention, ever. Same thing in 2004. They'll be at the GOP convention next week as well. Nothing new there.
The media is playing it up a bit because of the Clinton drama. Got a narrative to feed. It's one hungry motherfucker.
But, since you're supposing Obama got more overall coverage, there were more negative stories about him than McCain in total, yes?APF said:Perhaps, but according to your study, Print news generally followed the trend of media outlets overall, which gave Obama, on balance, more positive coverage than negative, and McCain, on balance, more negative coverage than positive.
GhaleonEB said:
Will do.Dartastic said:I'm still scared. I've stopped following these PoliGAF threads (as informative as they are) as politics and I have a very love/hate relationship, but the fact that Obama and McCain are as close in the polls as they are despite the circumstances is very disconcerting.
P.S. Ghaleon, I left Oregon for a job in CA, and it saddens me. Please eat some Burgerville for me. That goes for you too, Reilo.
GhaleonEB said:And as for the polls: it's gonna be okay.
FlightOfHeaven said:I'm going to have to start pushing my friends to vote Obama. How some of them can go for McCain baffles me. Reeks of ignorance.
*starts compiling things*
Can't remember the last time I had a Burverville burger... :xDartastic said:I'm still scared. I've stopped following these PoliGAF threads (as informative as they are) as politics and I have a very love/hate relationship, but the fact that Obama and McCain are as close in the polls as they are despite the circumstances is very disconcerting.
P.S. Ghaleon, I left Oregon for a job in CA, and it saddens me. Please eat some Burgerville for me. That goes for you too, Reilo.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080825/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_loyal_oppositionGOP opens 'war room' at Democratic convention
By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer Sun Aug 24, 9:48 PM ET
DENVER - They're grossly outnumbered by a swarm of Democrats, but national Republicans have set up shop in Denver, hoping to thrust themselves into the media's coverage of the Democratic convention.
While the spotlight naturally is focused on Barack Obama, national Republicans have set up an effort to grab media coverage, or at least offer some balance to the Democrats' show.
The GOP effort includes a "war room" and media center less than a mile from the convention hall and making top Republicans such as Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney available for press conferences and satellite interviews to television stations across the country, especially in swing states.
There's a new GOP web site (http://www.notready08.com) with videos and ads, along with plans for rapid responses to attacks on GOP nominee-to-be John McCain and to speeches from the Democrats.
A staff of two dozen has set up shop in temporary workspace up the road from the Pepsi Center and thousands of journalists. Security at the war room is tight to avoid problems with Democratic protesters.
reilo said:Can't remember the last time I had a Burgerville burger... :x
speculawyer said:GOP opens 'war room' in Denver
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080825/ap_on_el_pr/cvn_loyal_opposition
War on Drugs, War on Terror . . . War on Democrats?
Is this typical? Don't the parties usually lay low during the other side's convention?
FlightOfHeaven said:I'm going to have to start pushing my friends to vote Obama. How some of them can go for McCain baffles me. Reeks of ignorance.
*starts compiling things*
Dartastic said:Same. I have a friend from grade school who found me on Facebook, and he is very obviously a McCain supporter. I almost didn't add him. My biggest concern is actually getting my friends to vote, as I'm only 23 and the majority of my friends are around the same age. That really is a HUGE problem. Why they're so unconcerned with politics baffles me.
GrotesqueBeauty said:I might have to put on the blinders for a while. The sleaziness of the constant smearing, name calling, and all around reactionary bullshit and straight up lies depresses me. I'm getting too disgusted with the entire process for my own good, but I keep watching out of some mix of anger and morbid fascination. It doesn't even have to do with the specific candidates anymore, I'm just burnt on the never-ending mounds of bullshit that just keep piling up and growing and growing. There are so fucking few voices of levity out there that make me feel like a sane regular person. I mean, shouldn't anyone who's sane be tearing their hair out at the bald faced absurdity of all this ? It's astounding that we've gotten to the point as a country where the vitriolic atmospshere of this election is expected and passes for normal.
... Who am I kidding, I will probably be watching the conventions like a hawk, stressing myself out and mourning the state of the world.
GrotesqueBeauty said:I might have to put on the blinders for a while. The sleaziness of the constant smearing, name calling, and all around reactionary bullshit and straight up lies depresses me. I'm getting too disgusted with the entire process for my own good, but I keep watching out of some mix of anger and morbid fascination. It doesn't even have to do with the specific candidates anymore, I'm just burnt on the never-ending mounds of bullshit that just keep piling up and growing and growing. There are so fucking few voices of levity out there that make me feel like a sane regular person. I mean, shouldn't anyone who's sane be tearing their hair out at the bald faced absurdity of all this ? It's astounding that we've gotten to the point as a country where the vitriolic atmospshere of this election is expected and passes for normal.
... Who am I kidding, I will probably be watching the conventions like a hawk, stressing myself out and mourning the state of the world.
eclipze said:I'm really fuckin pissed I had to work today. I can't believe i missed a chance to see Obama in my hometown.
Clevinger said:It's not really clever at all when you start using campaign tactics that kicked the shit out of you eight years ago. It is sad, though.
Krowley said:I actually think this is MUCH more aggressive than anything Karl Rove did in either campaign.
Rove usually let other groups do the negativity thing, while Bush tried to play innocent. He was more sly about it. The McCain campaign is unapologetic about it. They come right up in your face and just release a barrage of negative ads about every conceivable issue, day after day after day. Constant aggression.
I haven't paid much attention to this group. Is it intentional or just funny that the name brings "cougar" to mind?v1cious said:looks like the PUMAs are falling apart.
v1cious said:looks like the PUMAs are falling apart.
http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/08/24/so-what-about-you-john-mccain/#more-4376
JoshuaJSlone said:I haven't paid much attention to this group. Is it intentional or just funny that the name brings "cougar" to mind?
Tamanon said:I hope it gets no coverage. The only reason it was even created was to get on the news. Political advertising has taken a big turn with the advent of the 24/7 news networks. No longer do you need to actually buy ads to get the message out, just release the ad to the networks and it'll be pontificated on.