-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF Interim Thread of cunning stunts and desperate punts
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
In 2005, McCain when defining the Bush Doctrine stated "pre-emptive strikes...have to be contemplated under certain scenarios". On January 5th, 2008, in response to a question from Charlie Gibson that asked the Republican Presidential candidates if they agreed with the Bush Doctrine, McCain said it was a "tough question" but he stated, "I agree with it [the Bush Doctrine i.e. preemptive strikes]." On 7/27/08, McCain was asked again about the Bush Doctrine and he said, "Do I favor it [pre-emptive war], no." He also emphasized that it is why a President must have knowledge and experience to make such a call.
Now, if Sarah Palin is truly qualified, then why doesn't she even know what it is? And if she doesn't, which is clear from last night's interview, she directly conflicts with John McCain's view that the Bush Doctrine can only be utilized by a President with "vast knowledge and experience". This is why her not knowing the Bush Doctrine is a big deal to me, regardless of which candidate I support. If a lipstick wearing hockey mom gets pissed, I want her to have "knowledge, experience, and background" to be able to decide on whether or not to initiate a preemptive strike under certain scenarios.
Now, if Sarah Palin is truly qualified, then why doesn't she even know what it is? And if she doesn't, which is clear from last night's interview, she directly conflicts with John McCain's view that the Bush Doctrine can only be utilized by a President with "vast knowledge and experience". This is why her not knowing the Bush Doctrine is a big deal to me, regardless of which candidate I support. If a lipstick wearing hockey mom gets pissed, I want her to have "knowledge, experience, and background" to be able to decide on whether or not to initiate a preemptive strike under certain scenarios.
ryutaro's mama
Member
AniHawk said:
I agree totally.
That's why if the perception doesn't change, McCain will win.
Barring anything dramatic, it will be very hard to change people's minds at this point.
And the undecided pool is getting smaller everyday.
ryutaro's mama
Member
ZealousD said:
Clown shoes.
ZealousD said:
They actually use "out of touch."
Nice. This needs to be a sticking theme now. McCain needs to be the
old
There also absolutely needs to be commercials about Obama's health care plan and economic plan for the middle class. A lot of people think he's going to raise their taxes to pay for universal health care. And he needs to keep the message simple.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Ok guys, it's 9 am here, and it's well past sleepy time.
It's been a lark. Have a good one all, and Huzah stay irritating and I may like you yet... just ask APF.
It's been a lark. Have a good one all, and Huzah stay irritating and I may like you yet... just ask APF.
typhonsentra
Banned
You're not alone.ZealousD said:
ryutaro's mama
Member
Huzah said:
All joking aside, we like to debate Palin here but to your average Joe, it doen't matter much and I doubt it will turn anyone off from voting for McCain in the longrun.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
McCain by chosing Sarah Palin put winning an election ahead of doing what is best for this country. If he truly vetted Palin, he would have realized she does not have the "knowledge, experience, and background" to be qualified to be a President executing a pre-emptive strike (the Bush Doctrine). If he feels 100% certain he is going to live through his first term, then that is one thing, but if he doesn't, it is clear he hasn't thought it out because by dying or becoming incapacitated, he will have put America in the hands of someone who, by his own definition, is not qualified to make the difficult decisions.Huzah said:
This goes to his judgement. If that doesn't matter to voters, then we are lost.
ZealousD said:
First half: Not so Much.
Second half: Well....
I doubt this is their new "harder" stance. We'll just have to wait and see.
I think a much better ad can be made out of pointing out who runs his campaign and why they're running his campaign. I think the "more of the same" line has been sullied.
I don't think the Obama camp would do something like that though.
527s?
Edit: I'm all for painting McCain as out of touch. Making ads with Rubik's Cubes, disco balls and saying that he doesn't use E-Mail isn't the way to go.
ZealousD said:
Not sure how hard they want to hit on the Corp tax cuts meme, it's easily argueable that if we want to give relief to businessess and create more jobs we should lower their taxes so they have more capital to reinvest into their businesses.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/539.html
"In this paper, we explore how tax policies in fact affect a countrys growth rate, using cross-country data during 1970-1997. We find that statutory corporate tax rates are significantly negatively correlated with cross-sectional differences in average economic growth rates, controlling for various other determinants of economic growth, and other standard tax variables."
ryutaro's mama
Member
DenogginizerOS said:
"I'd rather lose an election, than lose a war."
"I'd rather win an election, than choose the most qualified candidate and leave America in good hands."
Country First.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
Barack Obama had the judgement to speak out against the Iraq war before it started. Barack Obama said we should go after Bin Laden, if we have "actionable intelligence" even if it required going into Pakistan. At the time, McCain and Bush ridiculed this notion. Now, almost a year later, Bush is doing just what Obama suggested.eznark said:
Obama has proven he has the ability to think through problems and has demonstrated that he is well ahead of the McCain's and Bush's on what we should do. While not perfect, he at least has demonstrated humility to admit when he is wrong but has the strength to learn from his mistakes and draw from his experiences, good and bad, to better this country. That is why Democrats nominated him.
-Kees- said:
This probably is
http://thepage.time.com/2008/09/12/obama-ad-rips-mccain-on-lobbyist-ties/
AniHawk said:
exactly.
was that literally cut and pasted from an Obama flier?
I'm speaking specifically to the "ready to lead" problem I have with Palin. That deficiency is shared with Obama.
The more responsible ticket for America in regards to foreign relations would be Biden-Obama, but that lacks the appeal.
Obama may turn out to be an excellent President, Palin could be the best VP ever, but neither has really shown anything that supports those assumptions.
Steve Youngblood
Member
I don't follow this point. He might lose the election, and some might argue after the fact that it was too soon to run. That's fine.eznark said:
"But by that same token" really doesn't fit. Whether he truly deserves it or not by some impossible-to-define objectivity, he had to earn his spot on the top of the ticket. He didn't just get the spot handed to him by party elders in a smoke-filled room. He DID earn it.
ryutaro's mama
Member
syllogism said:
Much better.
-Kees- said:
Honestly, is Obama really trying to convince people McCain doesn't know how to use email or go online? Hoefully this isn't Obama new super strategy he's been talking about. Also, mentioning that McCain has been a senator for so long, that's probably going to play to a positive.
Planned Parenthood fights back against McCain's sex-ed ad. It's airing in Denver and Pittsburgh. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0kiLoMY1hg&eurl=http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/
Frank the Great
Banned
New email.
One-stop voter registration website sounds awesome.
One-stop voter registration website sounds awesome.
syllogism said:
I just remembered this from the other day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZHjRBeOC8s
He talked about all of McCain's lobbyist ties. I thought that it was good he was doing it but that he needs to put it in an ad and make it more personal. It's not just about lobbyists running a campaign, it's also about what it says about McCain.
That ad sounds like what I was talking about.
Tim the Wiz
Banned
eznark said:
I don't think the parallels are quite that strong, really. That was a decision majorly influenced by events outside the central power structure of the Democratic Party, very much dissimilar with the decision to pick Palin as VP.
Unlike her, Obama's knowledge, background and even experience most certainly aren't decisively lacking. His level of experience in the state-wide and furthermore, nation-wide legislative process would dispel that. At this point, it would be highly doubtful that he would be someone incapable of doing a competent job of running the country as per the views of the Democrats. Again, as per a specific set of ideological and political views on how to govern the state.
GhaleonEB said:
nah, this is going to be Kennedy v. Nixon all over again. The debates will catapult the unproven/untested political newb ahead of the crusty ol' curmudgeon.
Does Obama has mob ties to solidify it?
I'm not comparing the reasoning/logic/strategy behind the nominations. I'm just saying neither has shown any indication they could be President. If making a "responsible" choice was paramount, then neither should be up there.
I'm not judging this as good or bad, mind you, just saying that the "Palin is a scary VP" argument rings false to me coming from Obama supporters. In my mind, they are both frightening when looking at experience.
Steve Youngblood
Member
Eh, I'm still cautiously optimistic that the McCain campaign is going to completely run out of steam. They're not going to win on the issues alone, and they're not going to beat Obama in the long-term as the quintessential 'Change' ticket.GhaleonEB said:
Looking back at the Celebrity ads, McCain still doesn't have a message, but he does have buzz now. Maybe he can keep getting stories out there each and every day, winning on the narratives. Personally, though, I think this is going to end at some point.
Either that, or I completely lose faith in the Democratic party for being completely ineffectual.
DenogginizerOS
BenjaminBirdie's Thomas Jefferson
eznark said:
No. I am an informed voter who has the capacity to articulate why I am supporting someone.
You say Obama and Biden is the "more responsible ticket for Americ in regards to foreign relations" but it "lacks appeal". What kind of appeal do you want in a ticket? An aged war veteran with ties to scandals (Keating Five) who choses a young, inexperienced, folksy, hockey mom turned governor who was a runner up in a beauty pageant and beleives God is dictating our actions in Iraq to be his running mate is better?
Obama has actually met with foreign dignitaries. So has Biden (many, many times). McCain most definitely has done this. But Palin states that her being able to see Russia from parts of Alaska is part of her foreign policy experience and incorrectly assumed that many of the Vice Presidents of the past had not met dignitaries when in fact most, if not all, have before entering office. Obama most definitely has teh ability to extrapolate what he has seen and heard and apply that to his viewpoints without needing lipstick to dress it up.
Mahadev said:
Did we forget the years 2000 - 2007.
http://www.bea.gov/briefrm/gdp.htm
So do you disagree that lowering corporate taxes leads to more economic growth?
Here's a peer reviewed paper from the Journal of Public Economics (2005) which agrees with my statement.
http://www.econ.ucsd.edu/~rogordon/growth.218.doc
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked