Tyrone Slothrop
Banned
i'm starting to wonder if legislative experience and executive experience are really worlds apart like they make it out to be.
-
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 Thread of Republican's Turn at Conventions (Palin VP - READ OP)
- Thread starter Amir0x
- Start date
- Status
drakesfortune said:
This is ALL a tired bullshit talking point. The basic executive experience of running a nationwide campaign *cough*making decisions from day one*cough* is infinitely more CHALLENGING than what Palin descrived as "54 employees and a $6 million budget".
If you want to go deeper into what this "experience" yielded in both cases, you have a small town suddenly drowning in debt, and crystal meth central in Alaska vs a historical movement that beat all the odds against one of the most political savvy machines (the Clintons).
On the foreign policy stuff, Bush is following Obama's advice on Iran. Do you even follow the news, or do you just listen to Limbaugh and Hannity?
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
mozfan12 said:
Yeah because all of those things you want are free and have no cost to you right? If the government raises taxes on corporations, who pays those taxes? Certainly not the corporations. They pass taxes, and all costs on to the consumer. If you tax a small business owner, what's the first place they cut? Employees. It's always the first thing you cut. That's why Carter's economy was the worst we had since the depression. 20% interest rates to buy a home back then. 10-12% unemployment. If you take the money from small business, corporations they do two things, they raise prices to the end consumer, you, and then they fire a bunch of employees, also you. You can't expect there to be no reaction from a massive increase in taxes and a massive increase in government.
I mean seriously, we just had Bush for 8 years running the government. Is that REALLY the guy you want to control you eduction, your health care, and your retirement? Really? REALLY? Because Obama won't be president forever, and some day some dip shit like Bush will be president again, and he'll be running every aspect of your life. You will be helpless to control your own destiny. I am not for government control of my life, thank you very much.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Me no leave.polyh3dron said:
It's been a good night for the monkey.
Feces and all.
Xenon
Member
FightyF said:
People were blasting her for anything that could get a grip on. At first it was because she was a mayor of a small town. Then it was that here daughter was pregnant. Now more facts are coming out and people have something more substantial. Thing is it doesn't matter because people who blindly follow their beliefs will defend their position with anything.
I'd stack some Obama followers next to a religious zealot any day. "We're good, they're evil." Same shit different icon.
speculawyer
Member
Actually, it was Jimmy Carter that started the US involvement in Afghanistan. But that doesn't fit into the GOP image of him being milquetoast, so none of them know it. But facts are never a big issue for GOPers.drakesfortune said:
Yeah, McCain is certainly his own man alright. What a bullshit line.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/03/palin-pick-threatens-to-f_n_123717.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/03/palin-pick-threatens-to-f_n_123717.html
Thunder Monkey
Banned
At least I have a reason to support my candidate!Xenon said:
*breaks out the lube and photos of Obama*
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
Bulla564 said:
Once again, you have to deny the fact that Palin was governor running a 12 billion dollar budget with 25000 employees, and commanding the national guard to deal with wildfires and and other natural disaster needs for your argument to have any weight. And then the argument that Obama running his campaign for HIMSELF, with a selfish goal, is the equivilent of running even a small town with a 12 million dollar budget (way to exaggerate that) for the PEOPLE is totally laughable. If Obama wants to keep going down that road, the McCain camp will eat that laughable experience ALIVE. I mean you really have to be drinking the coolaid to say with a straight face that running a campaign, which his campaign MANAGERS REALLY run is at all the same as being a mayor or a governor. Seriously man, that argument is worse than no argument at all.
speculawyer
Member
See what I did there? And can you dispute any of it?drakesfortune said:
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Ohhh God!sp0rsk said:
I can't stop myself from rolling in it!
polyh3dron
Banned
Did you watch the speeches tonight?Xenon said:
ComputerNerd
Banned
soul creator said:
That doesn't dispute my post.
Which of Obama's views are right of center?
That website basically says, since Obama isn't the most extreme left as you can get, he's a centrist. That's a little funny. One of the points implied that he's a centrist because he supports the war in Afghanistan. I'm sorry, but only the most extreme liberals don't support the war in Afghanistan.
Stoney Mason
Banned
drakesfortune said:
Since we are in extreme land then I assume you are voting for Ron Paul then since your statements don't seem to match up with the person you are in this thread shilling and spinning for.
drakesfortune said:
thats what I fucking hate about republicans, we dont live in some socialist state, we dont live in state where government is on my back at every moment. We live in a fucking government that is scared to raise taxes because their pockets wont get full from big bussinesses.
To me big government is a government that taps into to my calls, looks at the books that I check, checks out if I do anything that they regard anti-american
speculawyer
Member
drakesfortune said:
Wee! Replace function makes drakesfortune look like instant idiot!
MightyHedgehog
Member
Thinking on it a little more, I don't see how Palin is going to help McCain with anything but trying to consolidate the religious right and the same morons who give G.W. Bush positive votes to his approval rating. All this attack dog action is going to do is push moderates and independents to the Dems. I just hope the gloves come off where appropriate for the Obama campaign.
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
speculawyer said:
:lol Well played. There's also no proof that I am not Sarah Palin.
polyh3dron
Banned
Kinda like the Bush administration amirite?mozfan12 said:
Stoney Mason
Banned
MightyHedgehog said:
Which is my point. Until the polls start to swing and show some change in the position of certain demographics all he has done is get the people who were going to already vote for him to vote for him.
speculawyer
Member
Obama said that if Pakistan wouldn't go after the high-value terrorists then he would.ComputerNerd said:
And the GOPers instantly went insane over that saying he was totaly crazy for saying something like that.
And a couple months later we are doing exactly that . . . something we should have been doing about 7 years ago but Bush was too much of a wuss and decided to waste our military and money on Iraq instead.
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
MightyHedgehog said:
Hypocrite much? You're kind of attack dogging it right here. Either you have contempt for yourself and the attack dogs on the right, or you have contempt for neither. The choice is yours.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
No even the most extreme liberals support the war in Afghanistan. Well, not war in the strictest sense, but definitely more then we've done.ComputerNerd said:
We wrecked a country for no reason and left another to become controlled by our true threat.
Obama is smarter then John McCain when it comes to national security. We'd likely have captured and tried Osama bin Laden by now had Obama been the president. Or Al Gore. Sucks that 2000 was stolen from him.
ComputerNerd
Banned
MightyHedgehog said:
Obama's campaign, and the media, have been on the attack for quite some time now.
Some Palin bullshit call-outs:
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform _ not even in the state senate."
THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.
PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
PALIN: "I have protected the taxpayers by vetoing wasteful spending ... and championed reform to end the abuses of earmark spending by Congress. I told the Congress 'thanks but no thanks' for that Bridge to Nowhere."
THE FACTS: As mayor of Wasilla, Palin hired a lobbyist and traveled to Washington annually to support earmarks for the town totaling $27 million. In her two years as governor, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation. While Palin notes she rejected plans to build a $398 million bridge from Ketchikan to an island with 50 residents and an airport, that opposition came only after the plan was ridiculed nationally as a "bridge to nowhere."
PALIN: "There is much to like and admire about our opponent. But listening to him speak, it's easy to forget that this is a man who has authored two memoirs but not a single major law or reform _ not even in the state senate."
THE FACTS: Compared to McCain and his two decades in the Senate, Obama does have a more meager record. But he has worked with Republicans to pass legislation that expanded efforts to intercept illegal shipments of weapons of mass destruction and to help destroy conventional weapons stockpiles. The legislation became law last year. To demean that accomplishment would be to also demean the work of Republican Sen. Richard Lugar of Indiana, a respected foreign policy voice in the Senate. In Illinois, he was the leader on two big, contentious measures in Illinois: studying racial profiling by police and requiring recordings of interrogations in potential death penalty cases. He also successfully co-sponsored major ethics reform legislation.
PALIN: "The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars."
THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama's plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain's plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Obama would provide $80 billion in tax breaks, mainly for poor workers and the elderly, including tripling the Earned Income Tax Credit for minimum-wage workers and higher credits for larger families.
He also would raise income taxes, capital gains and dividend taxes on the wealthiest. He would raise payroll taxes on taxpayers with incomes above $250,000, and he would raise corporate taxes. Small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year would see taxes rise.
Rapping Granny
Banned
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEX4y0v_8yc
Made a better case for Obama than the ones on Larry King tonight.
Made a better case for Obama than the ones on Larry King tonight.
NullPointer
Member
MightyHedgehog said:
Yep. The republicans can have that backwards, hopelessly lost lot that is the 27% who approve of our current president.
And if the religious right fall into ranks behind McCain, they are as oblivious to the past, and their crass manipulation by the Republican election machine as those other lost souls.
SouthernDragon
Member
It doesn't, and the Obama campaign hasn't been running on "Experience" they've been running on "Judgement." McCain's raising a huge stink about how experience matters, and then they pick Palin, which counters his argument.
Palin has executive experience! -> McCain does not.
Conclusion: Is Palin more qualified than McCain for the Presidency? If so, why is she not leading the ticket?
McCain has years and years of experience! -> Palin has 20 months as governor and a few more years as a Mayor.
Palin has experience running her hometown and Alaska for a few years. Honestly, I don't remember her time as Mayor, but she's been Governor for 20 months. Perhaps you can argue that it is what you do in that time period that matters, which leads into:
Palin has done more than Obama! She's on the border with Russia, is leader of the National Guard in Alaska, fought corruption in her own party, and been a good governor overall. -> Obama has more legitimate claims than she does.
Ooh, am I a partisan hack? Let's see.
Well, let's take some of the more widely touted claims for Palin, and then let's contrast that with Obama's actual record.
She's on the border with Russia, which gives her experience dealing with Russia.
Highly disputable. Outside of western Russia, its Siberian areas are deserted. Fishing disputes do not amount to high stakes diplomacy (yet).
She overthrew corruption in her state, against her own party!
Records show that once she did this, she put in people loyal to her, but weren't necessarily competent. From the fiasco with Alaskan dairy industry to demanding librarians throw out books, it's hard to make a case for her being a beacon against corruption.
How about being fiscally responsible, and throwing out earmarks?
She left her small town of 4,000-7,000 (the numbers shift) with a debt of 20 million dollars. Not much to show for it, either. It started with zero debt. As governor, she hired a lobbyist to garner around 147 million dollars (correct me on the number, if you please) in earmarks for her state.
She opposed the bridge to nowhere!
Only after it was made clear her state would be footing a good amount of the bill. She kept some of the funds anyways.
Let's count her years in city council, as mayor, and as a governor. Hell, include PTA. Let's contrast that with Barack, and his accomplishments.
PTA - In charge of a group of parents, responsible for influencing individual school policy.
Community Organizer (South Chicago) - In charge of a sizable population of people and getting them homes and jobs. Small staff.
City Council/Mayor - In charge of 53 people. Responsible for the day-to-day affairs of 4,000-6,000 people.
Illinois Representative (Illinois Senate) - In charge of an unknown amount of staff. Responsible for a district containing 200,000 people. Sponsored 800 bills in his 7-8 year tenure. Notable bills include ethics reforms, health care for children, and civic justice. Also in charge of administration for a charity board.
Governor - In charge of a sizable staff. Responsible for an entire state of 600,000 people.
U.S. Senator - Represents a state with a sizable population. Unknown staff. Known for heading ethics bills early on in office.
That's just from what I know. I didn't add much for Palin because, well, she's been covered in this thread.
tl;dr
Republicans made this about experience. Democrats made it about judgment. McCain picked someone with little to no experience. Hypocrisy imminent.
Furthermore, Obama's been battle-tested. He knocked the Clintons out. The damn Clintons. He's been on the trail for two years, making his case, while attending to his duty as a Senator.
Palin was plucked out of the blue for this role. Did she merit and work for her positions in Alaska? Yes. Did she work for her position as VP? Nope.
Palin has executive experience! -> McCain does not.
Conclusion: Is Palin more qualified than McCain for the Presidency? If so, why is she not leading the ticket?
McCain has years and years of experience! -> Palin has 20 months as governor and a few more years as a Mayor.
Palin has experience running her hometown and Alaska for a few years. Honestly, I don't remember her time as Mayor, but she's been Governor for 20 months. Perhaps you can argue that it is what you do in that time period that matters, which leads into:
Palin has done more than Obama! She's on the border with Russia, is leader of the National Guard in Alaska, fought corruption in her own party, and been a good governor overall. -> Obama has more legitimate claims than she does.
Ooh, am I a partisan hack? Let's see.
Well, let's take some of the more widely touted claims for Palin, and then let's contrast that with Obama's actual record.
She's on the border with Russia, which gives her experience dealing with Russia.
Highly disputable. Outside of western Russia, its Siberian areas are deserted. Fishing disputes do not amount to high stakes diplomacy (yet).
She overthrew corruption in her state, against her own party!
Records show that once she did this, she put in people loyal to her, but weren't necessarily competent. From the fiasco with Alaskan dairy industry to demanding librarians throw out books, it's hard to make a case for her being a beacon against corruption.
How about being fiscally responsible, and throwing out earmarks?
She left her small town of 4,000-7,000 (the numbers shift) with a debt of 20 million dollars. Not much to show for it, either. It started with zero debt. As governor, she hired a lobbyist to garner around 147 million dollars (correct me on the number, if you please) in earmarks for her state.
She opposed the bridge to nowhere!
Only after it was made clear her state would be footing a good amount of the bill. She kept some of the funds anyways.
Let's count her years in city council, as mayor, and as a governor. Hell, include PTA. Let's contrast that with Barack, and his accomplishments.
PTA - In charge of a group of parents, responsible for influencing individual school policy.
Community Organizer (South Chicago) - In charge of a sizable population of people and getting them homes and jobs. Small staff.
City Council/Mayor - In charge of 53 people. Responsible for the day-to-day affairs of 4,000-6,000 people.
Illinois Representative (Illinois Senate) - In charge of an unknown amount of staff. Responsible for a district containing 200,000 people. Sponsored 800 bills in his 7-8 year tenure. Notable bills include ethics reforms, health care for children, and civic justice. Also in charge of administration for a charity board.
Governor - In charge of a sizable staff. Responsible for an entire state of 600,000 people.
U.S. Senator - Represents a state with a sizable population. Unknown staff. Known for heading ethics bills early on in office.
That's just from what I know. I didn't add much for Palin because, well, she's been covered in this thread.
tl;dr
Republicans made this about experience. Democrats made it about judgment. McCain picked someone with little to no experience. Hypocrisy imminent.
Furthermore, Obama's been battle-tested. He knocked the Clintons out. The damn Clintons. He's been on the trail for two years, making his case, while attending to his duty as a Senator.
Palin was plucked out of the blue for this role. Did she merit and work for her positions in Alaska? Yes. Did she work for her position as VP? Nope.
drakesfortune said:
I mean seriously, we just had Bush for 8 years running the government. Is that REALLY the guy you want to control you eduction, your health care, and your retirement? Really? REALLY? Because Obama won't be president forever, and some day some dip shit like Bush will be president again, and he'll be running every aspect of your life. You will be helpless to control your own destiny. I am not for government control of my life, thank you very much.
drakesfortune said:
Just doing what Obama would do.
Agent Icebeezy
Welcome beautful toddler, Madison Elizabeth, to the horde!
Bending_Unit_22
Member
No you're correct, 3 of the candidates have ZERO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE. The only one with any is Palin. How much does that matter, well most of the worst presidents were senators and most of the best governors and generals. Legislative experience is nowhere near as good as executive experience but it is political experience and there McCain slaughters Obama with no contest which is why the Obama camp tried to compare their presidential candidate with the republican VP. However, that isn't working out since the republican VP just showed she can go mano a womano with Obama on experience which is embarrasing if you ask me.speculawyer said:
As to whoever asked for a Palin supporter (while insulting other supporters who've posted which I won't join in) I'm certainly one. We're seeing the rebirth of conservatism which is one reason why the dems and media have been so panicked since she was announced.
speculawyer
Member
A whole 4 days. :lol :lol :lolComputerNerd said:
drakesfortune said:
OMG COMMIESS!!! Serisouly dude... do you think that perhaps all democrats want to do is make all these things ACCESSIBLE to everybody??? (not fucking dictate what you have to do). It's not like the private sector will suddenly evaporate in the US.
Aside from a meager list of acomplishments (aside from an ethic's and a buse of powers candal), it has been states over and over that SHE DID NOT GIVE ONE ORDER to the national guard. That point is moot.
LOL Palin did not run for HERSELF. She did it for the people... is that your argument?
Fun fact: Palin said that running Wasilla was "not rocket science", yet she hired the first ever City Manager to run it for her. This experience argument is really fun.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Please... never breed.Bending_Unit_22 said:
ComputerNerd
Banned
Slurpy said:
That last part is funny. That would raise outsourcing. I thought he was against outsourcing?
Bending_Unit_22
Member
Yes, and she is more experienced than the entire other democrat ticket, both parties botched their presidential selections badly this year but at least the republicans recovered on the VP pick.FlightOfHeaven said:
As for Palin's experience, 5 and some odd years on a small town city council, 5 or so years as a small town mayor, 2 years as head of the Alaska Oil and Natural Gas Commision (not elected but still executive), and 2 years or so as governor. Plus since running a national campaign suddenly counts as experience according to Obama, she'll have 2 months of that also. Not to mention she is one of the most popular governors in the nation and would be the most popular absent the trumped up troopergate "scandal."
And the rest.... no time.
Clever. Very clever.Thunder Monkey said:
ComputerNerd
Banned
speculawyer said:
It started long before Palin's pick.
Bending_Unit_22 said:
Actually the panic comes from McCain not doing a thorough process in picking a partner and how that poor judgment and panicked decision-making would result in future poor judgment and panicked decision making in the unfortunate event should he become president.
Also, if Sarah Palin's a rebirth of conservatism, George W Bush was too.
drakesfortune
Directions: Pull String For Uninformed Rant
MThanded said:
Yeah well, community organizers are not a constituency of the Republican party, nor is there any hope that community organizers would vote for a Republican under ANY circumstance. I have no doubt that community organizers will be offended by her speech, but to be real, that's not a single vote lost. On the other hand, small town America IS a huge constituency of the Republican party, and it also happens to be the group that is by far the weakest of Obama supporters. So at the expense of community organizers, a non-republican voting block, she strengthened her hand with swing voters in rural America. It was a brilliant move.
speculawyer
Member
Panicked? :lol :lol Belly-laughing is more accurate.Bending_Unit_22 said:
Good luck on the fiscally irresponsible theocratism. I think the country has had quite enough of it.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked