• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Zeliard

Member
APF said:
Obama's skin color is both a positive and a negative. If he were white he'd be where John Edwards is today, but at the same time he loses votes because he's black. Obama's key appeals as a mystical figure are not his, "John McCain owns FOREIGN CARS" ads, but rather his unique personal story and alleged "transcendence" of race. The argument that race plays no role in his success, simply because he loses votes from racist Dems, is myopic.

I never said it plays no role whatsoever - that would be a strawman. Obviously, there are some who will vote for him mostly because of his melting pot background and that it would be an exciting change to have a black U.S. president for the first time, but I have no doubt that they are grossly outnumbered by those who will not vote for him because of the color of his skin. I don't see how you could possibly argue against such a thing, when you take a long, hard look at this country and its past, and the verbal and written attacks that have been launched at Obama throughout the campaign (not to mention the polling).

In the beginning of the primaries, Obama was basically a young nobody relatively new to the political scene, held in considerably lower regard than the likes of John Edwards. He was completely written off as a legitimate contender by the media and everyone else, and few really gave him a realistic chance even when it was just down to him and Hillary (the dominant Clinton machine, he's a 2012 candidate, etc). And as I posted earlier, Hillary was beating him for quite a while when it came to the black vote, and he had to fight to win them over (many thought he wasn't "black enough" - here's one quote, "When black Americans refer to Obama as ‘one of us,’ I do not know what they are talking about."). So why does he get no real credit ("he'd be where John Edwards is now"), now that he's on the verge of the presidency?

Obama is where he is now not because he's black, but because he's extremely intelligent, knows how to reach out to people (which Gore and Kerry both couldn't do), and has the correct ideas and beliefs on the vast majority of issues out there. He's also ran an extremely impressive campaign, particularly his ground game. And that's why he will ultimately win, despite the obvious (and not-so-obvious) racism and prejudice.
 

Tamanon

Banned
Looks like the McCain camp is slightly bending and allowing CNN to put a producer in there also. It's bizarre that this is something you need to even negotiate.
 

syllogism

Member
Developing: TVNewser has learned all the networks were prepared to ban the use of pictures and video from Gov. Sarah Palin's meetings at the UN today. The ban was in protest of the McCain campaign's restriction on editorial presence.

We hear the networks had arranged for a pool camera to cover all the meetings, and at least three journalists were to be present as well (one print, one radio, one TV). Earlier today, the McCain campaign said it would allow just one editorial person inside. Later, the campaign limited it to a camera only.

Within the last few minutes, the campaign reversed course and will allow a CNN producer in to the meetings.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser...torial_presence_for_palins_un_visit_95323.asp

e: more here http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/0908/More_on_Palin_press_protection.html
 

grandjedi6

Master of the Google Search
Branduil said:
Don't forget, one woman for each America.
What is it with unelected Democratic VP candidates turning out to be douchebags? Ferraro, Lieberman and now Edwards. Seems only Bentsen has avoided the curse as of late.
 

diffusionx

Gold Member
numble said:
He was a very rich guy talking about the poor. The $500 haircut, and the stories from John Kerry and Russ Feingold didn't help him either.

Fuck that. The $500 haircut was concocted bullshit. Everyone on Capitol Hill gets expensive haircuts. Everyone on Capitol Hill wears expensive, tailored suits. Why? Because they have to look good for the cameras. They can't look like shit on TV, and in front of the people they are trying to woo.

Plus, the idea that a rich person cannot talk about and try to help the poor is insane. The fact is that people in power can and should talk and do more to help the poor, and most of the people in power are rich. But if the only thing rich people are "supposed" to do is help rich people get richer, then you have, well, you have the American government of the past several decades. It is class war bullshit, except unlike the usual narrative it is the rich people doing all the fighting.
 

Cloudy

Banned
Holy crap! I just saw another Goolsbee segment on CNN. He actually printed out McCain's "plan" and held it up in an index card :lol
 

numble

Member
diffusionx said:
Fuck that. The $500 haircut was concocted bullshit. Everyone on Capitol Hill gets expensive haircuts. Everyone on Capitol Hill wears expensive, tailored suits. Why? Because they have to look good for the cameras. They can't look like shit on TV, and in front of the people they are trying to woo.

Plus, the idea that a rich person cannot talk about and try to help the poor is insane. The fact is that people in power can and should talk and do more to help the poor, and most of the people in power are rich. But if the only thing rich people are "supposed" to do is help rich people get richer, then you have, well, you have the American government of the past several decades. It is class war bullshit, except unlike the usual narrative it is the rich people doing all the fighting.
Russ Feingold? John Kerry?
 

APF

Member
ronito said:
I've always said that Edwards had the right message in the wrong package. His policy resonates with people that feel left out of the "first America" as things progress more and more down the urination economics track this of course grows, so it's hardly surprising that his policy and whatnot are popular. Now, that being said, a man that pays $400 for a haircut, has multiple estates and gets paid thousands of dollars to talk about wage ineqaulity is not the best man to present such a message.

I agree that Edwards' aesthetics presented a mixed message, but at the same time I think the '04 primary Edwards came across as "genuine enough," while his relative inexperience made him second fiddle to the dour candidate we ended up with.

Re: Obama, if he were white how genuine would his "hope and change" message appear, when he was another young white guy but less well-known than the former VP pick, who had already been through an election and came very close to winning? Is "hope" really a more substantial argument than Edwards' "Two Americas?" I don't think you can discount the power of someone saying he's a "change" and literally having a "different face than the guys on dollar bills" (or whatever he said). Not to mention, if Obama were white, how would he have peeled off Hillary's lockdown of the AA vote? Could he have done that if he had a pastor and long-time mentor who was making what many still feel were racially-charged sermons? Would his Presidency of the Harvard Law Review be as celebrated? Would his rise from community organizing be so meteoric? Could he have had a chance to rise politically, in Chicago, in the same trajectory, in the first place?


Edit: in the beginning of the Primary race, Obama an unprecedented amount of positive coverage, and the people saying he's not black enough--all two of them--jumped the Clinton ship the instant they had an excuse to vote for the guy who was at least a little blacker than Hillary.
 

numble

Member
APF said:
I agree that Edwards' aesthetics presented a mixed message, but at the same time I think the '04 primary Edwards came across as "genuine enough," while his relative inexperience made him second fiddle to the dour candidate we ended up with.

Re: Obama, if he were white how genuine would his "hope and change" message appear, when he was another young white guy but less well-known than the former VP pick, who had already been through an election and came very close to winning? Is "hope" really a more substantial argument than Edwards' "Two Americas?" I don't think you can discount the power of someone saying he's a "change" and literally having a "different face than the guys on dollar bills" (or whatever he said). Not to mention, if Obama were white, how would he have peeled off Hillary's lockdown of the AA vote? Could he have done that if he had a pastor and long-time mentor who was making what many still feel were racially-charged sermons? Would his Presidency of the Harvard Law Review be as celebrated? Would his rise from community organizing be so meteoric? Could he have had a chance to rise politically, in Chicago, in the same trajectory, in the first place?

Hillary had no staff in the Super Tuesday caucuses. And nearly zero staff in the 11 contests afterwards. She spent over $4 million for Mark Penn's services, while $4 million buys Obama 400 field staff for 4 months.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
diffusionx said:
Fuck that. The $500 haircut was concocted bullshit. Everyone on Capitol Hill gets expensive haircuts. Everyone on Capitol Hill wears expensive, tailored suits. Why? Because they have to look good for the cameras. They can't look like shit on TV, and in front of the people they are trying to woo.

Plus, the idea that a rich person cannot talk about and try to help the poor is insane. The fact is that people in power can and should talk and do more to help the poor, and most of the people in power are rich. But if the only thing rich people are "supposed" to do is help rich people get richer, then you have, well, you have the American government of the past several decades. It is class war bullshit, except unlike the usual narrative it is the rich people doing all the fighting.

And Edwards went pussy when the media brought this up. He straight flopped. That's one reason why he didn't win the NOM NOM.
 

Y2Kev

TLG Fan Caretaker Est. 2009
I saw a sign up today that said OBAMA? MCCAIN? WHO CARES! I want the government to LEAVE ME ALONE with a meeting date and place for the college libertarians. I thought of jaydubya. lol.
 
RubxQub said:
I agree with you in part, but you discredit Obama's far superior ability to run a campaign compared to Edwards. Obama is a much more relevant candidate than Edwards for this reason alone, not to mention his greater charisma and oratory skills.
If Obama were white, he'd be where Biden is today.
 

mj1108

Member
speculawyer said:
Props to CNN for pulling its reporters from what became a campaign commercial instead of a news event.

The snowball disaster that is the McCain/Palin ticket continues to roll downhill...... They could have used this as a huge positive story (as long as she didn't fuck up)...but they instead decide to pit the media against them even more.

I'm surprised they had let CNN and not Fox News.

Big props to CNN. Large, large balls.

Cloudy said:
Holy crap! I just saw another Goolsbee segment on CNN. He actually printed out McCain's "plan" and held it up in an index card :lol

Was it a blank index card? :lol
 

GhaleonEB

Member
so_awes said:
where's my hit of Hopium for today?????!!!?
http://www.pollster.com/

New polling shows Obama strengthening leads in swing states. North Carolina is now toss up, after the last three polls were tie, +3 McCain and today another tie. Michigan tilts blue again and Obama seems to be widening up his lead. Colorado might be pulling a New Mexico and Iowa and being put out of play for McCain. New poll has Obama +2 in Florida. Oregon tips back to solid blue.

so fucking high right now

Props to CNN for pulling their reporters and cameras, though it sounds like they've been appeased now. I like how McCain giving the media the cold shoulder is becoming a story in and of itself. No press conferences since Palin was picked. None.
 

grandjedi6

Master of the Google Search
APF said:
I agree that Edwards' aesthetics presented a mixed message, but at the same time I think the '04 primary Edwards came across as "genuine enough," while his relative inexperience made him second fiddle to the dour candidate we ended up with.

Re: Obama, if he were white how genuine would his "hope and change" message appear, when he was another young white guy but less well-known than the former VP pick, who had already been through an election and came very close to winning? Is "hope" really a more substantial argument than Edwards' "Two Americas?" I don't think you can discount the power of someone saying he's a "change" and literally having a "different face than the guys on dollar bills" (or whatever he said). Not to mention, if Obama were white, how would he have peeled off Hillary's lockdown of the AA vote? Could he have done that if he had a pastor and long-time mentor who was making what many still feel were racially-charged sermons? Would his Presidency of the Harvard Law Review be as celebrated? Would his rise from community organizing be so meteoric? Could he have had a chance to rise politically, in Chicago, in the same trajectory, in the first place?

I think we're getting way too far into the "what ifs?" now. There is no way we would know what would have happened had Obama not been black or Hillary not a woman, ect. The same can be true for any person. Changing such a critical part of a person's life could have any number of effects.
 

Odrion

Banned
Here is a fun what if: Would a Kerry/Edwards candidacy been a disaster? The economic collapse happening on their watch, and Edward's scandal, would of skunked the Democrat's image big time.
 

grandjedi6

Master of the Google Search
Odrion said:
Here is a fun what if: Would a Kerry/Edwards candidacy been a disaster for the Democratic image? The economic collapse happening on their watch and Edward's scandal would of sunk the Democrat's image.
Edwards didnt' start cheating until 2006 and its possible that a Kerry adminstrative policy could have stalled or weakened the economic problems that we are currently facing.
 

APF

Member
grandjedi6 said:
I think we're getting way too far into the "what ifs?" now. There is no way we would know what would have happened had Obama not been black or Hillary not a woman, ect. The same can be true for any person. Changing such a critical part of a person's life could have any number of effects.
I agree, which makes it strange that people here can't allow themselves to admit such a thing.


Edit: the point is not that "hope" is a bad message (well, it's kinda bad when you're using the same message as Bill Clinton when you're trying to say his Presidency was an awful time for Americans); the question was, how genuine it would have been with a white Obama running against another young charismatic guy with arguably a better story, better message, better policies, who won his party's VP nom and came very close to being VP in the last election
 
Fatalah said:
What's this about the media vs. Palin's visit to the UN?
The media is once again showing how biased they are against Palin by refusing to cover her appearing as a legitimate politician.

Meanwhile, there were rumors that Obama was going to play a pick-up basketball game, and reporters and crews everywhere are scrambling to try and get him making the elusive half-court shot.
 

RubxQub

φίλω ἐξεχέγλουτον καί ψευδολόγον οὖκ εἰπόν
Odrion said:
Here is a fun what if: Would a Kerry/Edwards candidacy been a disaster? The economic collapse happening on their watch, and Edward's scandal, would of skunked the Democrat's image big time.
Here's an even funner thought: This isn't going to affect the Republicans image one iota after this election!
 

numble

Member
APF said:
I agree, which makes it strange that people here can't allow themselves to admit such a thing.
However, saying someone would be in exact position X if they were a different race/gender is also entirely disingenuous.
 

mj1108

Member
Steve Youngblood said:
The media is once again showing how biased they are against Palin by refusing to cover her appearing as a legitimate politician.

McCain/Palin have nobody but themselves to blame.
 

APF

Member
numble said:
However, saying someone would be in exact position X if they were a different race/gender is also entirely disingenuous.
It might be disingenuous if that weren't my opinion on a hypothetical, but it is, so it isn't.
 

Agent Icebeezy

Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
Old?
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_09/014841.php

LIMBAUGH'S LATEST SMEAR.... I don't want to alarm anyone, but it appears that Rush Limbaugh is blisteringly stupid when it comes to race and ethnicity.

Rush Limbaugh baselessly asserted of Sen. Barack Obama: "Do you know he has not one shred of African-American blood?" Limbaugh continued: "He's Arab. You know, he's from Africa. He's from Arab parts of Africa.... [H]e's not African-American. The last thing that he is is African-American."

Limbaugh concluded his little rant by telling his audience, "Everything seems upside-down today in this country."

The irony was rich.

As Media Matters reported, this "Obama is actually Arab" line has been making the rounds in right-wing circles, and has been featured in a variety of conservative settings. It's also demonstrably ridiculous.

First, it's probably worth noting that Obama is not "Arab" "from Africa," he's American from Hawaii. (You know, the place Cokie Roberts mocks for being "exotic.") Second, his father is from Kenya, and Kenya isn't an Arab part of Africa. Third, "African American" generally refers to black people in the United States of African lineage. "The last thing that he is is African American"? Please.

But let's not overlook the point here -- far-right hacks aren't quite done with the smear. The efforts to label Obama "Arab" is just the latest twist in a larger effort launched by those motivated by fear and bigotry.

"Everything seems upside-down today in this country." Especially for those who listen to right-wing radio.
 

ronito

Member
APF said:
I agree that Edwards' aesthetics presented a mixed message, but at the same time I think the '04 primary Edwards came across as "genuine enough," while his relative inexperience made him second fiddle to the dour candidate we ended up with.

Re: Obama, if he were white how genuine would his "hope and change" message appear, when he was another young white guy but less well-known than the former VP pick, who had already been through an election and came very close to winning? Is "hope" really a more substantial argument than Edwards' "Two Americas?" I don't think you can discount the power of someone saying he's a "change" and literally having a "different face than the guys on dollar bills" (or whatever he said). Not to mention, if Obama were white, how would he have peeled off Hillary's lockdown of the AA vote? Could he have done that if he had a pastor and long-time mentor who was making what many still feel were racially-charged sermons? Would his Presidency of the Harvard Law Review be as celebrated? Would his rise from community organizing be so meteoric? Could he have had a chance to rise politically, in Chicago, in the same trajectory, in the first place?


Edit: in the beginning of the Primary race, Obama an unprecedented amount of positive coverage, and the people saying he's not black enough--all two of them--jumped the Clinton ship the instant they had an excuse to vote for the guy who was at least a little blacker than Hillary.
I think you discount his story too much.

It comes down to the right package to deliver the message much more so than race. In Obama you have this story that the downtrodden can believe in. For once they see a little guy that rose up and made something good of himself. A product of a single parent family that had to struggle to make it he had the chance to be just another greedy suit but gave that up to help the community he believed in. Someone who fights for the underprivileged because he at least knows what that's like. Same could not be said of Edwards, and definitely not of Clinton. Now does race play a large part of that story? Certainly. But to say it is because of race is oversimplification. To say a white candidate didn't get this chance is not entirely true. None of the white candidates had Obama's story and the clever enough staff to sell it effectively.
 

Branduil

Member
Odrion said:
Here is a fun what if: Would a Kerry/Edwards candidacy been a disaster? The economic collapse happening on their watch, and Edward's scandal, would of skunked the Democrat's image big time.
That's why I think having a Democratic president over the next four years is going to better for the Republican party, in the long run.
 

Xisiqomelir

Member
Branduil said:
That's why I think having a Democratic president over the next four years is going to better for the Republican party, in the long run.

You too Branduil? There truly are Gaborn Doctrine adherents everywhere.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
APF said:
I agree that Edwards' aesthetics presented a mixed message, but at the same time I think the '04 primary Edwards came across as "genuine enough," while his relative inexperience made him second fiddle to the dour candidate we ended up with.

Re: Obama, if he were white how genuine would his "hope and change" message appear, when he was another young white guy but less well-known than the former VP pick, who had already been through an election and came very close to winning? Is "hope" really a more substantial argument than Edwards' "Two Americas?" I don't think you can discount the power of someone saying he's a "change" and literally having a "different face than the guys on dollar bills" (or whatever he said). Not to mention, if Obama were white, how would he have peeled off Hillary's lockdown of the AA vote? Could he have done that if he had a pastor and long-time mentor who was making what many still feel were racially-charged sermons? Would his Presidency of the Harvard Law Review be as celebrated? Would his rise from community organizing be so meteoric? Could he have had a chance to rise politically, in Chicago, in the same trajectory, in the first place?

To be honest had Obama been white he wouldn't have had to go to Chicago to start his career. He wouldn't have had a Rev. Wright issue either.
 

APF

Member
mckmas8808 said:
To be honest had Obama been white he wouldn't have had to go to Chicago to start his career. He wouldn't have had a Rev. Wright issue either.
No, he'd be yet another charismatic white guy with legal prospects but no shepherding, and potentially the same racist / etc pastors that people try to associate with McCain and Palin.
 

grandjedi6

Master of the Google Search
Branduil said:
That's why I think having a Democratic president over the next four years is going to better for the Republican party, in the long run.
Unless of course things improve under the Democratic presidency or at least their policies are seen to stall the various problems. Then it tends to greatly favor the incumbent. Which isn't surprising, good presidency = better chances for the party and vice-versa.
 

gcubed

Member
Branduil said:
It's not so much the Gaborn doctrine as the "let-the-other-guy-take-the-fall" doctrine.

apparently there are two different doctrines then, because its not so much as "let the other guy take the fall" as it is, "our party is an embarrassing shell of ourselves and we need to look at where we completely fucked up our identity in the last 20 years to become the garbage you see today"

but thats just my point of view of the republican party. Which, if they were truly conservatives preaching fiscal conservatism and small government instead of the shit they are now, i'd 100% support them.
 

Cheebs

Member
APF said:
No, he'd be yet another charismatic white guy with legal prospects but no shepherding, and potentially the same racist / etc pastors that people try to associate with McCain and Palin.
He likely still would have been elected senator, somewhere, probably not Ill. since I doubt he would have gone to Chicago to create a political base if he was white. But he would have gotten into the senate one way or another based on his political ambitions/ability and his ease with being able to get political connections due to being president of Harvard law review (being president of Harvard law review more or less lets you pick any law or political career path you want).

And assuming he'd be as charismatic and have an equally strong political team advising him as a white guy he'd no doubt run for the presidency at one point still.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom