• 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 Tears/Lapel Pins (ScratchingHisCheek-Gate)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Amir0x

Banned
Smiles and Cries said:
is Clinton going to get her time on Hardball College Tour?

seemed unfair Obama just owned

Not sure if something changed since last night, but McCain is gonna be on and Chris Matthews has extended an invitation to Hillary as always. She has yet to accept.
 

thefro

Member
Smiles and Cries said:
is Clinton going to get her time on Hardball College Tour?

seemed unfair Obama just owned

Clinton thinks Matthews practices Misogyny, so she won't go on MSNBC anymore.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
APF said:
Eeeww, Wesley Clark?

Anyway, from an interview on Charlie Rose:


ROSE: Do you think that this — Korea, South Korea is an analogy of where Iraq might be, not in terms of their economic success but in terms of an American presence over the next, say, 20, 25 years, that we will have a significant amount of troops there?

MCCAIN: I don’t think so.

ROSE: Even if there are no casualties?

MCCAIN: No. But I can see an American presence for a while. But eventually I think because of the nature of the society in Iraq and the religious aspects of it that America eventually withdraws.

i think the bolded is his point. yeah, his quote has been taken out of context, but the thinking behind it is that it will take a while before the area stabilizes, and the US should not pull out until that happens. thats the issue most have about mccain's view on the war.
 

APF

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
i think the bolded is his point. yeah, his quote has been taken out of context, but the thinking behind it is that it will take a while before the area stabilizes, and the US should not pull out until that happens. thats the issue most have about mccain's view on the war.
Ok, but what does this have to do with Obama's lie or the comment I posted this in response to?


Edit: "...an American presence over the next, say, 20, 25 years?" "I don't think so."
 

thefro

Member
obama_dm_sidebar.jpg


Dave Matthews comes down from the sky to register a shit-ton of college kids and hippies for Obama. I'm hearing there's were over 2000 people in line outside the Obama office in Bloomington already trying to get tickets (and getting registered to vote) when the doors opened, and the line's still several blocks long.
 

Amir0x

Banned
I'm sorry but Dave Matthews is the least rockiest way to rock change that ever could possibly rock.

Dave Matthews is like anti-rock.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
APF said:
Ok, but what does this have to do with the comment I posted this in response to?


it has everything to do with the comment you responded to.


Star Power said:
Obama (and Clinton.. and Howard Dean... basically every Democrat) really has intentionally distorted McCain's " 100 Years" comment. That said, Wesley Clark made a great point yesterday on Dan Abrahms : this notion that the US will occupy that region peacefully in any capacity for long period of time is ridiculous, and shows that McCain doesn't have much of an understanding of the middle-east


APF said:
Edit: "...an American presence over the next, say, 20, 25 years?" "I don't think so."

he doesnt think so, but he also says, 'I can see an American presence for a while' .. so what is a while? the statements seem contradictory to me.
 

CoolTrick

Banned
So I just saw the poll where Obama is actually up in PA?! Crazy thing to come home to, for sure!

It's by the same firm that had Clinton up by 26 in PA two weeks ago and had her within 1 of Obama in North Carolina.

Except RCP is being selective and, for example, counted the Obama +2 PA one but hadn't counted the Obama +1 in North Carolina.
 

sprsk

force push the doodoo rock
So, is the campaign really rocked now that Hillary said Obama can't win, or is that just Drudge being silly again.
 

Alcander

Member
CoolTrick said:
It's by the same firm that had Clinton up by 26 in PA two weeks ago and had her within 1 of Obama in North Carolina.

Except RCP is being selective and, for example, counted the Obama +2 PA one but hadn't counted the Obama +1 in North Carolina.
I am definitely taking it with a grain of salt, I was more just surprised at how quickly the gap has been narrowed.
 

Alcander

Member
Also- Obama's graphic designers are really quite impressive... coming from a designer, the consistent quality and certain "brand image" they have built for him are something the other candidates should really take notes on.

(I've noticed this for a while, and I know its been said before, but that Dave Matthews poster really exemplifies the idea)
 

Amir0x

Banned
Well in general election polling, Obama still fares better than Hillary does in polls at the moment on average. So if OBAMA is not electable, that must mean...

...but in the broader sense, her saying "he cannot win" in the heated conversations she had with Richardson before the Obama endorsement is really an indirect reference to the Wright controversy.

She, and everyone else, knows this shit WILL be brought up in force in the general election. Whether or not this is gonna kill Obama yet is unknown... I admit I have my own worries about how serious it will be in the long term.

But in the short term, he has certainly weathered that storm.
 

KRS7

Member
Alcander said:
Also- Obama's graphic designers are really quite impressive... coming from a designer, the consistent quality and certain "brand image" they have built for him are something the other candidates should really take notes on.

(I've noticed this for a while, and I know its been said before, but that Dave Matthews poster really exemplifies the idea)

I agree, the branding work is excellent. There are many Fortune 500 companies that are not even close in this regard. The way the "O" logo can be broken down or built up in complexity is quite ingenious.
 

CoolTrick

Banned
I am definitely taking it with a grain of salt, I was more just surprised at how quickly the gap has been narrowed.

Well, that's sort of the point. Obviously the gap is narrowed, but the prior PA polls were kind of the "default" stats of a state. It basically tells us how much advantage in one state a candidate has going in.

But it's not like the gap couldn't be expected to narrow as campaigning was going on.

And yet, blame the media: I just read another news story proclaiming how with the PA polls tightening, Hillary is going to be on a death march. This is the kind of stupid shit that allows Hillary to do exactly what those same people hate: Be a comeback kid.
 

APF

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
he doesnt think so, but he also says, 'I can see an American presence for a while' .. so what is a while? the statements seem contradictory to me.
If I say, "I'll respond to your post in a while," would you expect to wait five years? 10 years? 20 years? 30 years?

"We might be there a while, but not that long because of the nature of the society in Iraq" is in no way contradictory or even difficult to interpret. It also directly speaks to SP's incredulity.
 

Amir0x

Banned
CoolTrick said:
Well, that's sort of the point. Obviously the gap is narrowed, but the prior PA polls were kind of the "default" stats of a state. It basically tells us how much advantage in one state a candidate has going in.

But it's not like the gap couldn't be expected to narrow as campaigning was going on.

And yet, blame the media: I just read another news story proclaiming how with the PA polls tightening, Hillary is going to be on a death march. This is the kind of stupid shit that allows Hillary to do exactly what those same people hate: Be a comeback kid.

exactly then, you should be happy!

Media will be all 'Hillary is losing grounds, might be close' then when polls close and she wins by 10, they'll go "SUPERDELEGATES REALLY HAVE TO BE WONDERING WHATS GOING ON IN VOTERS MIND AT THIS POINT"
 

Amir0x

Banned
Instigator said:
No, I don't think so, but I take issue with the claim that the Obama camp has some great graphic designers.

This famous image on the laptop, for example, has always reminded me of Colonel Sanders from KFC.

a.) That's a Nintendo DS
b.) That sticker was not graphically designed by Obama's camp. It was created by sticker robot
 

CoolTrick

Banned
Media will be all 'Hillary is losing grounds, might be close' then when polls close and she wins by 10, they'll go "SUPERDELEGATES REALLY HAVE TO BE WONDERING WHATS GOING ON IN VOTERS MIND AT THIS POINT"

Well yes but at the same time the fact that these idiots do it to themselves just makes me roll my eyes, because now I have to hear Hillary being proclaimed dead again for another three weeks.

Like, why is RCP only counting some PPP polls?
 

harSon

Banned
Amir0x said:
exactly then, you should be happy!

Media will be all 'Hillary is losing grounds, might be close' then when polls close and she wins by 10, they'll go "SUPERDELEGATES REALLY HAVE TO BE WONDERING WHATS GOING ON IN VOTERS MIND AT THIS POINT"

Yeah, I brought that up this morning :/
 

Alcander

Member
Instigator said:
No, I don't think so, but I take issue with the claim that the Obama camp has some great graphic designers.

This famous image on the laptop, for example, has always reminded me of Colonel Sanders from KFC.
Thats a DS!
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
APF said:
If I say, "I'll respond to your post in a while," would you expect to wait five years? 10 years? 20 years? 30 years?


coming from you? i'd expect to never get a response.


"We might be there a while, but not that long because of the nature of the society in Iraq" is in no way contradictory or even difficult to interpret. It also directly speaks to SP's incredulity

is that a different quote? because the one you linked to says this: "No. But I can see an American presence for a while. But eventually I think because of the nature of the society in Iraq and the religious aspects of it that America eventually withdraws."

where does he say not that long? the problem is that to him, 10-15 years might not seem like that long. he doesnt really say. how long does he expect us to be there? has he ever given some sort of timeline?
 

Tamanon

Banned
quadriplegicjon said:
coming from you? i'd expect to never get a response.




is that a different quote? because the one you linked to says this: "No. But I can see an American presence for a while. But eventually I think because of the nature of the society in Iraq and the religious aspects of it that America eventually withdraws."

where does he say not that long? the problem is that to him, 10-15 years might not seem like that long. he doesnt really say. how long does he expect us to be there? has he ever given some sort of timeline?

Timelines are a sign of surrender as he told Romney in the debates.
 

APF

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
is that a different quote?
No, that's what's called, "a paraphrase." Since you were having trouble with your reading comprehension, I felt it might be helpful for me to explain more clearly what he was saying.

Anyway, instead of me pursuing your red herring, do you or do you not admit that lte 20 years is not gte 100 years? Do you or do you not admit that McCain doesn't see the viability of a standing presence ala Europe, Japan or S Korea there?
 

Tamanon

Banned
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/30/debate.main/index.html

The sharpest exchange in the debate came when Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, was asked about the McCain campaign's charge that he once said he favored a strict timetable for removing troops from Iraq.

Romney has consistently denied ever having backed a timetable and said McCain was taking a small portion of a quote out of context.

"It's simply wrong," Romney said. "By the way, raising it a few days before the Florida primary, when there was very little time for me to correct the record, falls in the kind of dirty tricks that Ronald Reagan would have found reprehensible."

The whole thing is ironical considering the 100 years bit.
 

APF

Member
No one can pin themselves down to a strict timetable, including the Dems. It's all going to be dependent on the situation when they arrive in the WH.
 

Tamanon

Banned
APF said:
No one can pin themselves down to a strict timetable, including the Dems. It's all going to be dependent on the situation when they arrive in the WH.

Well duh. Who says differently?
 

ari

Banned
Happen to catch the hardball snuff....i mean stuff.

You know, maybe SNL really isn't that far from their skits...I mean like, dead serious. Its TOO much of a coincidence that he got a easier interview then Hannah Mantona.
 

Particle Physicist

between a quark and a baryon
APF said:
No, that's what's called, "a paraphrase." Since you were having trouble with your reading comprehension, I felt it might be helpful for me to explain more clearly what he was saying.


you didnt paraphrase, his response was purposefully vague, and you added your own assessment to it. the problem is that you can come to all kinds of conclusions with that vague response.

do you think McCain would pull out before iraq stabilizes?

do you think iraq will stabilize with a US presence in the next 4 years? 8 years?

we all know his intentions... republicans and democrats alike. the question is whether you agree with the current strategy and if its worth it to continue funding such an exorbitant war for an undetermined amount of time.


APF said:
Anyway, instead of me pursuing your red herring, do you or do you not admit that lte 20 years is not gte 100 years? Do you or do you not admit that McCain doesn't see the viability of a standing presence ala Europe, Japan or S Korea there?


where did i say otherwise? ive always said that his quote was taken out of context.
 

APF

Member
quadriplegicjon said:
you didnt paraphrase, his response was purposefully vague, and you added your own assessment to it. the problem is that you can come to all kinds of conclusions with that vague response.
Whaa? Charlie Rose gives dates. McCain says not that long. What's so hard to understand???
 
Incognito said:
Karl Rove calls Obama "elitist" and "arrogant" and sez he should do his homework



Rest of hilarity at link. And don't forget -- this is Karl Rove answering. :lol

Is he against Obama or Hillary? We all know he's against the dems... He's smart enough to know that whoever he attacks will be seen as his worst enemy. It reminds me of the conveniently placed Osama vid telling America not to vote for Bush. lol Is Rove a closet Obamaboy? Or is this just a coincidence? Time will tell...
 

Tamanon

Banned
xs_mini_neo said:
Is he against Obama or Hillary? We all know he's against the dems... He's smart enough to know that whoever he attacks will be seen as his worst enemy. It reminds me of the conveniently placed Osama vid telling America not to vote for Bush. lol Is Rove a closet Obamaboy? Or is this just a coincidence? Time will tell...

Rove has been more favorable to Clinton in his appearances on FOX, he's working behind the scenes for someone, I have no idea who.

BTW, doing the Hardball college tour is great press. They've been playing snippets and discussing it on every single MSNBC show so far. They'll probably do the same for McCain tomorrow.
 

thekad

Banned
I don't know quadriplegicjon, I think APF has sufficiently proven that McCain thinks America might be in Iraq ranging from "a while" to "20 years," maybe.

Can't argue those facts.
 

gkryhewy

Member
CoolTrick said:
Well yes but at the same time the fact that these idiots do it to themselves just makes me roll my eyes, because now I have to hear Hillary being proclaimed dead again for another three weeks.

Like, why is RCP only counting some PPP polls?

Why don't you write them another email whining about it? :lol

Like the RCP average means anything.

ari said:
Happen to catch the hardball snuff....i mean stuff.

You know, maybe SNL really isn't that far from their skits...I mean like, dead serious. Its TOO much of a coincidence that he got a easier interview then Hannah Mantona.

Jesus christ. With grammar like this, it's no wonder you're struggling with that Iowa test. What the hell are you trying to say here?
 

ari

Banned
xs_mini_neo said:
Is he against Obama or Hillary? We all know he's against the dems... He's smart enough to know that whoever he attacks will be seen as his worst enemy. It reminds me of the conveniently placed Osama vid telling America not to vote for Bush. lol Is Rove a closet Obamaboy? Or is this just a coincidence? Time will tell...
I'm not trying to start shit... but it shouldn't matter what he thinks anyhow.

But really, Im sure if he would've gave Obama props, you guys would've said that would be icying on cake. If he gave props to Hillary, you guys would've call them both out. If he called out hillary, you guys would agree with him. Its like the whole Edwards thing. The knee jerk reaction was quite predictable.
 

gcubed

Member
ari said:
Happen to catch the hardball snuff....i mean stuff.

You know, maybe SNL really isn't that far from their skits...I mean like, dead serious. Its TOO much of a coincidence that he got a easier interview then Hannah Mantona.

what did you expect from Matthews? Some intense cutting questions? I'm suprised he didnt fellate Obama on TV

stick with your repub boys instead of commenting on how easy they go on Obama. Dont use Matthews as a point in your arguement


edited... flyers/pens game is pissing me off and getting me riled up. need to contain the anger
 

Tamanon

Banned
ari said:
I'm not trying to start shit... but it shouldn't matter what he thinks anyhow.

But really, Im sure if he would've gave Obama props, you guys would've said that would be icying on cake. If he gave props to Hillary, you guys would've call them both names. If he called out hillary, you guys would agree with him. Its like the whole Edwards thing. The knee jerk reaction was quite predictable.

Nah, there are some people that you don't trust no matter what. It's why you don't see anyone wondering who Michael Moore endorses.

BTW, I can't wait to hear ari's spin after Chris Matthews goes easy again on McCain tomorrow:p
 

ari

Banned
gcubed said:
what did you expect from Matthews? Some intense cutting questions? I'm suprised he didnt fellate Obama on TV

stick with your repub boys instead of commenting on how easy they go on Obama, you wont sound as stupid
that was sorta my point.... and if i'm pointing out the obvious, why are you so bitter about it?

Tamanon: good point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom