• 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 THE END and FIST POUNDS (NYT: Hillary drop out/endorse Saturday)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cheebs

Member
Here is the thing. McCain NEEDS crowds he NEEDS more media attention. Obama is not going to do anything that gives him both of that. Is it rude? Sure. But this is a campaign and Obama knows how the game works. You don't fall for the trap.

sangreal said:
Obama does fine in townhalls, and he does tons of them. I don't see how doing them jointly with McCain benefits him. It's just a ploy for McCain to benefit from Obama's draw
Exactly. The crowd will be at least 5-10x what McCain normally gets. And he'd get tons of media coverage. McCain is the boring story of the campaign, he needs the attention and Obama would play into his hand by doing this.
 

Cheebs

Member
Revengeance said:
A debate in HD would be like the Kennedy/Nixon televised debate :lol :lol
All the debates will be in HD but the type of american who has a HD TV I suspect will lean Democrat anyway. ;)
 
Obama does well in townhalls, at least the ones I've heard.

Obama needs to stick it to McCain and tell McCain doesn't set the agenda.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
Obama in the past has shown that he gets sidetracked easily in townhalls. I love the guy but he's shown that he'll focus on past points rather than moving on, and because he's still addressing past stuff, he basically loses the initiative.
 

jmdajr

Member
If McCain wins, GAF will have the biggest meltdown in off-topic history.

I think I wil have my own personal meltdown! :lol
 

GhaleonEB

Member
sangreal said:
Obama does fine in townhalls, and he does tons of them. I don't see how doing them jointly with McCain benefits him. It's just a ploy for McCain to benefit from Obama's draw
And a ploy to try and put Obama on the defensive. We'll see how it goes.
 
maximum360 said:
Obama needs to stick it to McCain and tell McCain doesn't set the agenda.

Exactly.

McSame already considers himself the "wise" candidate, Obama agreeing to this will look like he's being led by his elder.
 

Tamanon

Banned
He'll just come back with a counter-offer for a different amount of debates, typical stuff.

And I don't know why McCain keeps throwing himself out there as a disciple of Goldwater.
 

GhaleonEB

Member
The Lamonster said:
Is there a schedule or timeline somewhere of the planned debates?
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/

Check the political calendar on the right.

SEPTEMBER 2008
26 Presidential debate in Oxford, Miss.

OCTOBER 2008
2 Vice Presidential debate in St. Louis, Mo.
7 Presidential debate in Nashville, Tenn.
15 Presidential debate in Hempstead, N.Y.
 
jmdajr said:
If McCain wins, GAF will have the biggest meltdown in off-topic history.

I think I wil have my own personal meltdown! :lol

I will personally give up on the country for good.

I will freaking post a rant that gets me banned for life from here.

Lets hope this does not happen.
 

Cheebs

Member
The Lamonster said:
First is Sept 26th. Then 2 in October.

All 3 will be sit down debates at a table, not podiums. One will be a "youtube" debate like those in the primaries, one a townhall one, and one traditional one.
 

Kildace

Member
BenjaminBirdie said:
Then dude, seriously, he needs to get better, and quickly, or he is going to foster a whole lot of resentment and McCain will become THE PEOPLE'S CANDIDATE in about three hours.

Pretty much. I completely agree with you and think that Obama will be defined as elitist and cowardly if he doesn't say yes. The McCain people will run it into the ground.
 

Evander

"industry expert"
whytemyke said:
1) Did I miss something where AIPAC is an organization designed to support the interest of Israel? It necessarily stems that if a nation is anything then the people who support them, especially their particular traits, are probably in that same vein. You can't say Israel is one thing but AIPAC is another when the two are so closely aligned (through no doing of Israel so much as thru AIPAC).

I've been inside of the belly of the beast, and I can tell you that AIPAC does not support ISRAEL, it supports the Israeli GOVERNMENT.

In a global climate where some call for the disolution of Israel altogether, those ARE two distinct things. In the early 2000s (before he softened a bit and began dismantling some of the settlements) my personal hatred of Sharon was on par with my personal hatred of Arafat, but that did not change the factthat I support Israel.

3) Nations shouldn't allow any terrorists inside their borders, but I think you'd agree that if a cell popped up in New York City and Canada rolled tanks thru New England without our permission to bomb the shit out of them, we'd be a little pissed off. Israel continually dictates it's will to the region with not even so much as respecting the other nations in the area, and if you're as learned on the information as you claim you are then here is where you'll offer proof to me of Lebanese appeals to the UNSC or any NGO's for help in dealing with the problem. Of course you'll also be able to offer me evidene of Israel using the proper, accepted avenues of international appeal to support their cause.

I do not support Israel's actions in Lebanon, but I will state that them doing something was more important than doing nothing. It is NOT a justification, but it is worth noting that Lebanon is not REALLY in control of themselves to begin with, so attempting to negotiate with them is a bit different from some one attempting to negotiate with the US. I view Israel's actions here not as evil, but as desperate. Israel being a sovereign nation itself can't accept the willful allowance of even a single terrorist attack. THAT is their motivation. While their behavior is indeed often wrong, it is hard to classify that motivation as "evil."

I'm guessing you're going to circumvent that entire paragraph in order for some cheap shot about how I either don't know anything or am racist. If it's because I don't know anything, then go ahead and teach me... seriously, I'm not closed off to learning if I'm uninformed.

Like I said, I'm not AIPAC, nor am I a fan of theirs. I subscribe to the REAL form of Zionism, Herzl's Zionism. I would have been happier with Uganda, but that decision was made before I was born, so I'll work with what there is.

When I called you uninformed I didn't mean it as an insult, but rather, I meant to make it clear that I did not believe you to be anti-semite. If you are interested in learning, I am happy to share with you the knowledge I've aquired. Even if you end up believeing everything I tell you, don't worry, you'll still hate AIPAC with a fiery passion. Honestly, I sometimes feel like they are a bigger obstacle to peace than Arafat was.



I don't think this thread is really the place, though. If you'd like to discuss things via PM or in another thread, just let me know, and I'd be happy to.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
man, mccains actually got a damn good campaign staff. i dont think this is gonna be the whole "Ducks in a barrel" thing that dems made it out to be back in january.
 

Tamanon

Banned
whytemyke said:
man, mccains actually got a damn good campaign staff. i dont think this is gonna be the whole "Ducks in a barrel" thing that dems made it out to be back in january.

Really? Except for whoever on that staff decided to have him give a petty, ineffective speech on the biggest night of the Democratic primaries.
 

whytemyke

Honorary Canadian.
Evander said:
I've been inside of the belly of the beast, and I can tell you that AIPAC does not support ISRAEL, it supports the Israeli GOVERNMENT.

In a global climate where some call for the disolution of Israel altogether, those ARE two distinct things. In the early 2000s (before he softened a bit and began dismantling some of the settlements) my personal hatred of Sharon was on par with my personal hatred of Arafat, but that did not change the factthat I support Israel.



I do not support Israel's actions in Lebanon, but I will state that them doing something was more important than doing nothing. It is NOT a justification, but it is worth noting that Lebanon is not REALLY in control of themselves to begin with, so attempting to negotiate with them is a bit different from some one attempting to negotiate with the US. I view Israel's actions here not as evil, but as desperate. Israel being a sovereign nation itself can't accept the willful allowance of even a single terrorist attack. THAT is their motivation. While their behavior is indeed often wrong, it is hard to classify that motivation as "evil."



Like I said, I'm not AIPAC, nor am I a fan of theirs. I subscribe to the REAL form of Zionism, Herzl's Zionism. I would have been happier with Uganda, but that decision was made before I was born, so I'll work with what there is.

When I called you uninformed I didn't mean it as an insult, but rather, I meant to make it clear that I did not believe you to be anti-semite. If you are interested in learning, I am happy to share with you the knowledge I've aquired. Even if you end up believeing everything I tell you, don't worry, you'll still hate AIPAC with a fiery passion. Honestly, I sometimes feel like they are a bigger obstacle to peace than Arafat was.



I don't think this thread is really the place, though. If you'd like to discuss things via PM or in another thread, just let me know, and I'd be happy to.
yeah, you're right. plus i'm starting to think that your views are just more rational versions of my own. but, as has been said by kings and queens, i am not a rational man.

Tamanon said:
Really? Except for whoever on that staff decided to have him give a petty, ineffective speech on the biggest night of the Democratic primaries.

I call it the ARod philosophy. Let them have their moment and THEN start making demands. otherwise it's like punching a whale.
 

theBishop

Banned
belvedere said:
When did Obama ever have problems in town halls? The impact may not be as great because of the smaller nature and tone of the town hall events, but that doesn't have anything to do with his performance at them.

He doesn't do well on townhall dot com. I think there was some confusion there...
 

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
In case you guys haven't been paying attention, Obama has gotten a lot of super today.

- Added Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD) for Obama
- Switched VP Walter Mondale (MN) from Clinton to Obama
- Added Sen. Frank Lautenberg (NJ) for Obama
- Added Gov. Phil Bredesen (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Gray Sasser (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Inez Crutchfield (TN) for Obama
- Added Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL) for Obama
- Added Rep. Mike Doyle (PA) for Obama
- Added Sen. Ken Salazar (CO) for Obama
- Added Sen. Tom Harkin (IA) for Obama
- Added Rep. Tom Udall (NM) for Obama
 

Cheebs

Member
ZealousD said:
In case you guys haven't been paying attention, Obama has gotten a lot of super today.

- Added Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD) for Obama
- Switched VP Walter Mondale (MN) from Clinton to Obama
- Added Sen. Frank Lautenberg (NJ) for Obama
- Added Gov. Phil Bredesen (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Gray Sasser (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Inez Crutchfield (TN) for Obama
- Added Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL) for Obama
- Added Rep. Mike Doyle (PA) for Obama
- Added Sen. Ken Salazar (CO) for Obama
- Added Sen. Tom Harkin (IA) for Obama
- Added Rep. Tom Udall (NM) for Obama
DemCon watch is the only site still tracking it it seems. CNN, MSNBC, and even Obama's own site gave up on their counters.
 
Part of McCain's speech problem is the setting. It's not flattering.

from huffpost:
Matt Yglesias notes: "...it's interesting that he's shifted his aesthetic from his old black and white 'fascist' aesthetic to a new green and white Islamofascist aesthetic."

Also, McCain's font wants to has serifs, but Obama's CAN has serifs (goddam). Really though, McCain's font is awful.
 
Nicodimas said:
Hardly...just enjoy common sense. I enjoy shooting guns. Every gun person knows dems will steal all guns rights if they could. I will start a new thread arguing this, but this is how I feel based off facts. I am a issue based voter and this one ranks up there. I will give you paranoid if needed..
You don't know this . . . you think this. Howard Dean got a perfect rating from the NRA.

Nicodimas said:
I like the amount of fallacies you all spew at times. It is quite enjoyable. To know politics you must have a poly sci degree from a accredited university. That is completely illogical.
I'll bet $1000 you cannot find any post of mine that says any such thing.
 

scorcho

testicles on a cold fall morning
Revengeance said:
Part of McCain's speech problem is the setting. It's not flattering.

from huffpost:


Also, McCain's font wants to has serifs, but Obama's CAN has serifs (goddam). Really though, McCain's font is awful.
McCain's font choice is awfully rigid and gives off a borderline militaristic feel to it. combined with that horrific green background choice it made for one of the ugliest backdrops ever.
speculawyer said:
I'll bet $1000 you cannot find any post of mine that says any such thing.
he was quoting me, but my point was that, for a political science major, i thought he'd be able to see past a vapid, delusional piece that simply dusted off the archetypal 'evil super liberal' argument for yet another election.
 

Azih

Member
Evander said:
If that is what he said, then I think I love the man. I haven't been able to take a look at his speach yet; I'm just basing my guesses at his stance on a combination of his platform on his website, and what I would personally like to see in a candidate.

I am SO anti-orange that it hurts.
By the Way Evander, you didn't respond to me in that thread where we discussed this issue quite a while ago.
 
ZealousD said:
In case you guys haven't been paying attention, Obama has gotten a lot of super today.

- Added Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD) for Obama
- Switched VP Walter Mondale (MN) from Clinton to Obama
- Added Sen. Frank Lautenberg (NJ) for Obama
- Added Gov. Phil Bredesen (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Gray Sasser (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Inez Crutchfield (TN) for Obama
- Added Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL) for Obama
- Added Rep. Mike Doyle (PA) for Obama
- Added Sen. Ken Salazar (CO) for Obama
- Added Sen. Tom Harkin (IA) for Obama
- Added Rep. Tom Udall (NM) for Obama
Holy sheit.
 

Trakdown

Member
So, update: Apparently, Obama and Clinton met- MSNBC caught up with his motorcade and he says he's going to be talking with her over the next few weeks.
 
ZealousD said:
In case you guys haven't been paying attention, Obama has gotten a lot of super today.

- Added Rep. Chris Van Hollen (MD) for Obama
- Switched VP Walter Mondale (MN) from Clinton to Obama
- Added Sen. Frank Lautenberg (NJ) for Obama
- Added Gov. Phil Bredesen (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Gray Sasser (TN) for Obama
- Added DNC Inez Crutchfield (TN) for Obama
- Added Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL) for Obama
- Added Rep. Mike Doyle (PA) for Obama
- Added Sen. Ken Salazar (CO) for Obama
- Added Sen. Tom Harkin (IA) for Obama
- Added Rep. Tom Udall (NM) for Obama
Ahh, the weak Supers with powers like Super Late to the Party and Super Irrelevancy.
Trakdown said:
So, update: Apparently, Obama and Clinton met- MSNBC caught up with his motorcade and he says he's going to be talking with her over the next few weeks.
Barack: Let's talk.

*meet*

Clinton: SURPRISE DEBATE!
Hillary66.jpg
 

Evander

"industry expert"
Azih said:
By the Way Evander, you didn't respond to me in that thread where we discussed this issue quite a while ago.

Yeah, I've been busy lately, and it's hard for me to get back to a thread once I've left it if its fallen from the front page.

I apologize, and I'm happy to pick up where I left off. What specifically was I supposed to respond to?
 
MSNBC: Obama Says He and Clinton Will Have Conversation in “Coming Weeks”

The network reports that the presumptive Democratic nominee told reporters as he got into his motorcade in Washington, D.C.

“I just spoke to her today and we’re going to be having a conversation in the coming weeks.”

When asked if Clinton she gave any indication if she will concede, he said “it wasn’t a detailed conversation.”

-the page
 

Dilbert

Member
scorcho said:
McCain's font choice is awfully rigid and gives off a borderline militaristic feel to it. combined with that horrific green background choice it made for one of the ugliest backdrops ever.
There was actually an article I read discussing the font choices of the candidates. The fontographers interviewed all pretty much felt that Optima was an AWFUL choice for McCain. I think it was linked through Daring Fireball...?
 

Tamanon

Banned
Plouffe saying good idea, but let's make it less structured and more lengthy town halls, definitely appealing, but let's wait a little bit since we JUST secured the nomination. Looks like it's a go, my guess is starting in August personally.
 

Kildace

Member
Tamanon said:
Plouffe saying good idea, but let's make it less structured and more lengthy town halls, definitely appealing, but let's wait a little bit since we JUST secured the nomination. Looks like it's a go, my guess is starting in August personally.

Haha, I love the Ben Smith spin on this :

That is, of course, the form of debate in which he refused to engage Clinton.

Awesome journalism, Ben.
 

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
funkmastergeneral said:
It's not an accomplishment until people can get race out of it. The right man won, it doesn't matter what color he is.

It kinda is about his race also. This has never happened in history.
 

Crisis

Banned
Cheebs said:
Here is the thing. McCain NEEDS crowds he NEEDS more media attention. Obama is not going to do anything that gives him both of that. Is it rude? Sure. But this is a campaign and Obama knows how the game works. You don't fall for the trap.


Exactly. The crowd will be at least 5-10x what McCain normally gets. And he'd get tons of media coverage. McCain is the boring story of the campaign, he needs the attention and Obama would play into his hand by doing this.

I could not agree with this post any more. Let McCain earn his own crowds.
 

Evander

"industry expert"
Azih said:

Okay, and what exactly are you looking for a response to?

I've said penty of times that I have no interest in preserving the settlements, so I guess our only area of disagreement is on where the borders of what is a settlement lie. As far as I'm concerned, moving backwards to a previous set of borders is a mistake because it is arbitrary. Solutions should not be emotionally based on who used to live where, but rather, they should be pragmatic based on who lives where right now. Gaza and the West Bank should be give up, with the Golan kept under Israeli control only because of the severe security risk it provides.



And terrorism is not acceptable as a "bargaining chip". Guerilla attacks against military personelle I would not support, but I would accept as a bargaining chip, but targetted attacks against civilians are simply not acceptable.
 

bob_arctor

Tough_Smooth
esbern said:
who wants to go to town on this asshole? i don't have time right now, but this article is nuts.

Well, yeah, it's Jonah Goldberg. Going to town on him would be a waste of time since he currently resides in Willful Ignorance, USA.

I just get a kick from the usual surrogates, the same motley crew bullshitting us since the invasion, whipping out these tired retreads. I eagerly await Rich Lowry's latest and Krauthammer is always good for a laugh as well.
 

woeds

Member
kkaabboomm said:
MSNBC: Obama Says He and Clinton Will Have Conversation in “Coming Weeks”

The network reports that the presumptive Democratic nominee told reporters as he got into his motorcade in Washington, D.C.

“I just spoke to her today and we’re going to be having a conversation in the coming weeks.”

When asked if Clinton she gave any indication if she will concede, he said “it wasn’t a detailed conversation.”

-the page
Awesome. Go on Obama, talk to her about a nice cabinet position. :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom