world

McCain says pundits being fooled; promises victory

123 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

123 Comments
Login to comment

Don't promise something you can't carry out. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pls do not offend 'pundits' your defeat is predicted by ordinary educated and uneducated 'people' !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Is anyone else getting tired of McCain and his broken record-like speeches on "winning" and "don't care what everyone says"? ...its so hollow its actually not funny anymore but pathetic. Having a pop at Obama for delaying a baseball game is just sad....does his campaign team think that baseball fans can turn his election fortunes?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

how can you blame him for being smug? the republican candidate lost in 2000, but still got the presidency. massive voter disenfranchisement can carry the day for him.

of course, this is not 2000, and i think that he's going to lose even WITH the disenfranchisement campaign. and i will celebrate the day.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama will probably win, but when he screws up everything like Dinkins did in NYC I want to hear all the Jews and blacks who say "I didn't vote for him, don't blame me." Can you imagine someone fresh out of college and only two years working experience becoming the CEO of a major corporation. Obama only has two years experience in the Senate -- the other two years, he was running for President. When he was a (part-time) state senator he voted "present" over 130 times -- which means he would not commit to anything. He keeps talking about change -- yeah, how? He writes two books, but never once mentions his mother or grandmother -- guess he is ashamed of them.

I'm no McCain fan either. Romney was the only qualified candidate -- he ran a successful corporation, was a good governor and rescued the SLC Winter Olympics.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Can you imagine someone fresh out of college and only two years working experience becoming the CEO of a major corporation.

LOL!!! Yeah, fresh out of college and major corporations put you on a "fast track" where you keep getting promoted every two years by showing short term results, and just fast enough to where the real impact doesn't settle in until after you've moved up. Now, among those fast-trackers are some real leaders, just as there are many real leaders among the non-fast-trackers not headed for the boardroom.

Anyway, Barack Obama is in a league far higher than Dinkins. While Romney was and is a capable manager, he never struck me as a leader. One of the most difficult things to lead or manage is a political campaign -- and no one should have any doubts that Barack Obama has waged a masterpiece of a campaign, starting with the defeat of the Clintons.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A loaf of bread would make a better president that bush, everyone knows that. mccain is bashing bush now too, way too late to join the chorus on that one. So complain as you may about obama, since at least he is smart, he will be a vast improvment over the intellectually challenged repub types like bush and palin.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain is a loser who has been shot down once, and he is about to be shot down again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain said, “Let’s go win this election and get this country moving again.”

But wait? Didn't the Dow mark the 2nd largest gains in its history yesterday, rising 11%? Didn't someone here (Sarge, I believe) claim that new home ownership was on the rise, even in the current sub-prime loan foreclosure climate? Isn't the country already moving again? Seems McCain is yet again either completely out of touch with the economy or saying anything and everything to boost his appeal to an electorate in which the majority has already decided McCain isn't the horse to back?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why is waving banners for the opposing candidate a need for security and (it sounds like) these people being ejected from the rally? Isn't America a land of the free?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

'The Alaska governor reprised her standard criticism of Obama’s economic plan. Labeling the Illinois senator “Barack the wealth spreader,” she said, “Joe the Plumber said it sounded to him like socialism. Now is not the time to experiment with that."'

Ah, Palin once again makes herself the stooge when she opens her mouth. Yes, let's call Obama 'Barack the Wealth Spreader', because we all know giving the average family more money is a bad thing! Hahaha! I can just see the indegent McCain supporters buying into this garbage and shouting, without having eaten much recently, "I don't want more money! I want to live in my McCain/Palin paradise and SERVE! Obama wants to give me more money! THAT'S SOCIALISM!"

I notice that Palin didn't say, "We think it's socialism", she said "Joe the (unlicensed) Plumber'" does. This was ALMOST clever... it nearly distances them when they lose, and they can blame it on 'Joe'.

Anyway, even amongst the GOP there are a big number of Obama supporters, all of whom site the negative campaigning of McCain/Palin as their number one reason for switching sides. Some say that McCain/Palin have effectively destroyed what the Republican side once stood for, and while only one senator has completely switched parties, others are mulling it over (and no, this is a not a CNN conspiracy, it comes directly from the Republican side). There campaign is most certainly NOT merely 'calling out Obama', it's full of slander and bilks that slander to 'fool' the people.

Fortunately, neither the people nor the pundits are that gullible, and McCain can utter this each and every day like he has been, and it still won't change the fact that Obama's got the election in the bag. It'll just be funny to hear McCain change his tone on November 4th from 'I like fooling the pundits', to, 'It's your damn fault, Sarah! YOU! Oh, and the pundits, and the media, and those damn guards at the Hanoi Hilton!.... my... my heart!', etc.

Game over, McCain... start seeking out the retirement home of your choice.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why didn't they include any of McCain's wicked gaffes during this speech? Man, it was awesome when McCain told the crowd that they were nothing but gun-toting religious fools! He finally got around to saying, "They are nothing but wrong" (after saying they were nothing but right), but god was that funny!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“I’m not afraid of the fight, I’m ready for it,” “Nothing is inevitable, we never give up,” “Let’s go win this election and get this country moving again.”“My friends, we’re winning in Iraq.”

Why is everything that comes out of McCain's mouth so simple?.......oh, his supporters.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Can you imagine Mccain as president? The old guy has anger management issues, which have been evident on the campaign trail.

He vehemently does not want to talk with dictators while the current administration already is talking with terrorist governments, Iran bein one.

His one and only economic/tax plan is basically to continue bush's tax cuts, which mccain himself opposed only last year before he decided it was politically convenient to support them.

The guy rails against Obama as a 'socialist' while himself voting for a socialist bill to nationalize and bail out banks and finance companies.

Heh, a mccain and palin team in the White House would be too busy frantically hammering nails into the coffin of what was once a great country to get anything done of importance.

Mccain and Palin in the White House

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Senility or denial, me thinks that McCain cannot see the writing on the wall. Feel sorry for the old chap, with him being shafted by his own party, etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

His one and only economic/tax plan is basically to continue bush's tax cuts, which mccain himself opposed only last year before he decided it was politically convenient to support them.

Actually I think the difference was the change in the economy, which is what most people attribute it to. I know you personally don't care...you'll say anything to score points....but others might be interested.

The guy rails against Obama as a 'socialist' while himself voting for a socialist bill to nationalize and bail out banks and finance companies.

Again, not really good evidence of McCain being socialist, and again something where you know the reality of the situation but present it as something different because you want to win at all costs. Reminds me of Carl Rove, someone you once called your master.

By the way, have you voted yet? ;)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When we get a protest like that, I’m always tempted to tell security

Arent't you Americans always blowing your hoen about freedom of speech?? Why call security??

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib - "Reminds me of Carl Rove, someone you once called your master."

I doth protest - Not true! Did you just make that up to score points? :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

John and Sarah = last kicks of a dying horse

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ah McCain, you've done it again.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"wealth spreader"...? no Obama is "big dream destroyer".

The late great President Reagan once said something like this:" small dream is not for American ,American is for big dream",and with that philosophy USSR was dismantled during President Reagan's period.

Now if Obama wants to change America into some kind of socialism by "take from the rich, from business and give it to the poor",he basically makes American become "small dreamer". Hope this will not happen to America. Hope McCain will win.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tclh: Sorry, bud, but Obama's got it.

I have a question for the McCain supporters out there who buy into all this 'socialism' crap. Scratch that, I have two or three questions.

Do you even know what socialism is? Can any of you give me an honest answer what it is, and how Obama comprises it? Please don't bother answering if all you can give us is an answer like, "It's what Obama wants!" or, "It's 'spreading the wealth'", or, "It's what China has!" etc., that clearly indicate you have no idea what socialism means. Also, please don't simply cut-and-paste a Webster's definition in your answer; that shows you know how to use a few keys on the keyboard, nothing else.

When this is done, I will gladly inform you as to what socialism means, why Obama has NOTHING to do with, and in fact why the policies of bush/McCain and Palin are far more socialist than anything you can say of Obama.

When Obama wins next week, and later down the road when you realize the country is better for it, how are you going to react? I realize that elections, and this one in particular, are extremely stressful periods of time, and many McCain supporters will suffer from utter despair (some have said it will be 'like dying'), but are you going to misdirect this despair and blame Obama for everything that ails you, or when Obama starts repairing the country and fixing your reputation, will you recognize his efforts?

Denial is truly a strong force, for anybody, and despite whether their beliefs are contrued by the general public to be 'correct' or not. Not to worry, though... when many are laughing at those who supported McCain and swore up and down for the campaign the polls and pundits were lying and McCain would win, I think most Americans and anyone else for that matter will simply extend you a hand and welcome you back to the land of the living.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you want to know what does socialism REALLY mean, please throw all theories about it into garbage bin and take a good look at "Socialist Republic of Vietnam" or "People republic of China' or "Democratic People Republic of Korea" .I rest my case.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not my choice, but McCain will be the winner.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Granpa McCain knows that many voting machines have been fixed to vote "McCain", no matter what the voter chooses.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tclh: please! lets not get carried away here. You cant be serious to believe that Obama is a socialist or Marxist, being of the same ilk as the leaders of the countries you named. hhhaaaa. Where does madness reside? It must be everywhere in this campaign

Former President Regan did nothing really to dismantle the USSR. It simply occurred at a time when he was in office.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Republican John McCain: “it’s wonderful to fool the pundits” and vowed to pull out an upset win over Democratic rival Barack Obama.

Heh, the final death throes of a sinking campaign.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama only has two years experience in the Senate -- the other two years, he was running for President.

He also has state senate experience.

McCain is a loser who has been shot down once, and he is about to be shot down again.

Plenty of vets got shot down over North Vietnam. They were not shooting rice at our planes. They had Soviet made AA guns and missles. McCain never played by the rules much, but his record is heroic even if its slightly chaotic. He is like having a good hearted biker for a politician.

Don't promise something you can't carry out. < :-)

Took the words out of my mouth. This is not straight talk. --Cirroc

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So if "pinko" Obama does actually win the election, will the Senate be disbanded and replaced with a Central Committee of the Prolotariat? How will Obama be addressed? Mr. President or Glorious Leader? Will there be a purge of reactionary elements such as the boy scouts and the GOP? Will there be a revision of history in which Curious George is rehabilated despite making one of the worst trades in MLB history. And what about McCain and Palin? Will these two reactionaries be sent to an American version of the Gulag Archipeligo, commonly known as Alaska? Could somebody among the disciples of Sen. McCarthy answer these questions?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What do you expect him to say? No candidate who is behind in the polls would ever say he is going to lose.

That said, there is of course still hope that some people wake up and realize that giving all parts of government to one party is not all that good an idea.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Did anyone catch this? McCain was out campaigning today with Joe the Plumber, henceforth to be referred to as JTP, who was fielding foreign policy questions. Perhaps McCain regrets not making him his running mate given the way things have worked out with Sarah Palin.

Anyways, JTP agreed with a person in the crowd who said "a vote for Obama is a vote for the death of Israel." He's not demonstrated competence to discuss plumbing but is now weighing in on foreign affairs???!!!

McCain's judgment is growing worse by the day. Betcha there aren't many embattled Republicans in Congress who want him bringing JTP to town, or showing up solo for that matter.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tclh: "If you want to know what does socialism REALLY mean, please throw all theories about it into garbage bin and take a good look at "Socialist Republic of Vietnam" or "People republic of China' or "Democratic People Republic of Korea" .I rest my case."

Sigh... how did I know I would get an answer like that? In other words, you could not and cannot name what socialism is, nor how Obama represents it, and thus seem to be merely saying that because you are afraid of Obama, and afraid of what the countries you mentioned represent, you are lumping them together under the same fears. Sorry, but that's the case here and your 'I rest my case' does not get around that fact.

Viet Nam: A failed communist country. In fact, Viet Nam is so NON-Communist they are strictly capitalist with a 'communist' label. I might point out that communist and socialist are not the same thing.

China: Another failed communist state, though more true to it's government label then neighbouring Viet Nam.

NKorea: Not at all a socialist state, NKorea is one of the ultimate examples of militant autocracy, or one might say, a dictatorship.

We're venturing into unrelated waters here, but the only country which ever TRULY came close to socialism was Cuba, but by definition socialism is not possible because it relies on other nations, and depends on people taking the helm (which is against socialist ideals), etc.

Anyway, Obama espouses NONE of these values. Does he aspire to provide health care on a more equal footing (we're talking access, not payment)? Hell yes, and anyone who is sane would wish the same. Does Obama wish to increase taxes to 5% of the country to make things a little better for the rest? Yes, and again, any sane person would want a better life for those who don't have one, or would want to have more social services for their health and well being.

Since when did social programs = socialism? That's a rhetorical question... they have equaled 'socialism' since John McCain took advantage of your lack of understanding of the word, and duped you into believing that your desire to have access to medical care is equal to you being a socialist.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Mitt Romney has now said "An Obama presidency is very likely." He's a self-interested player, he wants to be the Republican standard bearer for 2012 as crowds cheer Palin with "Sarah 2012." (Some of the negative stuff we're hearing about her may be coming from his sources.)

Arguably the Republicans would have been better off this time around with old Mittens, he would certainly be able to discuss the financial crisis in an intelligent manner (which would reassure a jittery public).

A lot of politics is luck; McCain had an adviser who once let it slip, "The death of Benazir Bhutto really helped us out in NH." Maybe, but others think Granite State voters were signaling their dissatisfaction with GWB by voting for the maverick they had voted for in 2000. Then McCain turned out not to be that in an effort to woo the Republican base, which had gone for GWB in 2000.

McCain was one of two Republicans to vote against GWB's tax cuts only to reverse himself to appeal to the Republican base. At no point did he ever attempt to explain why he had belatedly decided these enormous cuts were a good thing for the economy. He didn't really explain a lot of things for that matter....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even in Arizona, McCain is only two points ahead. The Arizonans I met all agreed McCain would have been a good president--in 2000.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Granpa McCain knows that many voting machines have been fixed to vote "McCain", no matter what the voter chooses.

Link please?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I agree - America would be in much better shape if it had turned its back on Curious George back in 2000. McCain would have been a much better choice then. Now, however, I think the general perception is that McCain is past his prime. Moreover, he has toned down what made him such an effective politican to pander to entrenched elements of the GOP base. What a shame. Moreover, considering the issue of mortality, I think McCain seriously damaged his chances of election by selecting such a politican lightweight as his running mate. Is Palin seriously the best choice? If she is, then the legacy of Curious George is even more tarnished because in addition to dropping the country in the crxpper, he has also held sway over the demise of the GOP.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

John McCain needs to do something to show voters he's still a maverick - like dumping Palin from the ticket and bringing in Hillary Clinton.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't know if the pundits are being fooled. Most of the pundits I have read haven't offered an opinion on who the winner of the election will be. Of course, I don't count pollsters as pundits.

McCain quite rightly promises victory. I don't say that it is correct that he will win. But it is right for him to promise it. He must keep his supporters energized.

I don't necessarily believe the polls. Obama is up but I don't think anyone really knows whether the so-called Bradley effect will kick in. Additionally, people can be whimsical and a lot can happen between now and Tuesday.

I think the election will be rather close in terms of popular vote. I don't know about the electoral vote. If McCain wins all the states rated as toss-ups at this time, he could win. So, the electoral vote could be close or Obama could take it by a landslide.

But, speaking personally and as much as I love baseball, I really don't care if the start of the World Series "has" to be delayed by 30 minutes. I'm not at all thankful that I have McCain's strong suggestion that if he decides to launch a full scale nuclear attack on Iran fifteen minutes into a game 7, I won't have to put my mind around it for at least 8 more innings.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Betzee:

" Anyways, JTP agreed with a person in the crowd who said "a vote for Obama is a vote for the death of Israel." He's not demonstrated competence to discuss plumbing but is now weighing in on foreign affairs???!!! "

JTP apparently has a better grasp on foreign affairs than you. There is nothing in Barrack Husseins background that suggests he is serious about protecting Israel. His mentor on Middle Eastern affairs is Rashid Khalid, islamist and former PLO terrorist with strong ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

No go spout more about poor Joe.

Moderator: We do not allow the use of Obama's middle name unless there is a valid reason for it mentioned in the story.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

John McCain needs to do something to show voters he's still a maverick - like dumping Palin from the ticket and bringing in Hillary Clinton.

HA! Now THAT would be something to see, and it might just very well revive McCain's campaign.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He's not demonstrated competence to discuss plumbing

Says who? The man is employed as a plumber. I think that entails some knowledge of plumbing, and not just theory either.

Anyways, JTP agreed with a person in the crowd who said "a vote for Obama is a vote for the death of Israel."

I am not sure what has brought in that opinion. I am also no sure why any Christian would be overly concerned with a country of people that have forsaken Christ. Even Muslims recognize Christ as a prophet! Maybe it has less to with prophets and more to do with profits? --Cirroc

0 ( +0 / -0 )

JTP apparently has a better grasp on foreign affairs than you...No go spout more about poor Joe.

Mr. Wurzelbacher is certainly entitled to his own views, but according to the Huffington Post:

[F]ive minutes with Joe The Plumber had Shepard Smith so frustrated that the Fox anchor felt compelled to issue a disclaimer, immediately following the segment, pushing back on any notion that Obama would mean the "death of Israel," saying: "I just want to make this 100 percent perfectly clear -- Barack Obama has said repeatedly and demonstrated repeatedly that Israel will always be a friend of the United States, no matter what happens once he becomes President of the United States.

So, by letting JTP speak for his campaign, McCain put FOX news in the unlikely position of defending Obama. This reflects the judgment of a leader we can trust? I think most Americans will agree "No."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

China: Another failed communist state, though more true to it's government label then neighbouring Viet Nam.

Good post Smith. But I am not sure why China is a failure. They have a billion souls to juggle and all the troubles that come with that figure, but seem to be doing pretty well considering. If they went pure capitalist and started polluting on a per capita basis on the level of the U.S. , gosh, the planet would be doomed.

Moderator: Back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SmithinJapan, it is really good for you to assure me that America under Obama will never become a socialist country. To me Socialism is not even good for garden's fertiliser.But why take any risk? vote McCain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

A loaf of bread would make a better president that bush

Yeah, but it wouldn't be as easy for Cheney to control a loaf of bread.

The McCain ticket is getting pilloried because it's a weak ticket. Weaker than Dole/Kemp. You have to go back two decades to Dukakis in 1988 to find a weaker ticket of either party. McCain sold out on his principles and then picked a lightweight VP candidate. It's as simple as that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But why take any risk?

If you think there is any risk whatsoever of the U.S. becoming a truly socialist country if Obama is elected president (as opposed to being elected dictator), then you are a fool of the highest caliber. That alone could be a reason to vote for someone other than you guy you support.

Anyway, plenty of socialist countries seem to be doing just fine. Some are our allies. But we subsidized our banks and loaning institutions even before they did, and I doubt Obama could do anything more socialist than that act of GWB and our sell-out congress, which was influenced to vote for that socialist measure by one John McCain. Perhaps you've heard of him? --Cirroc

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So, by letting JTP speak for his campaign, McCain put FOX news in the unlikely position of defending Obama. This reflects the judgment of a leader we can trust? I think most Americans will agree "No."

No indeed. JTP is not a spokesman of the McCain Campaign, nor will his foreign policy ideas be utilized if McCain wins, nor does his misrepresentation of Obama's position have any bearing on McCain's position. Its just Joe showing what a confused gullible individual he is, just like most of the population.

Anyway, thank you Betzee for sharing that. I knew the talk was nonsense as such should embarrass anyone who repeats it, I just had nothing to prove it. Thanks again. --Cirroc

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To me Socialism is not even good for garden's fertiliser

You must be unhappy with both parties in the US then, after the US Govt. bipartisan socialist moves to bail out the banks with $700B+ of the future earnings of the american proletariat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“When we get a protest like that, I’m always tempted to tell security, ‘Let them stay, maybe they’ll learn a thing or two,’” said Palin.

Palin learns new words!

tclh that means most countries in Europo are communist because they have a social security program???

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When you offer a nationalized health system so that those people who have no health insurance are able to seek treatment, that is called socialism. When you talk about national education standards, that is also called socialism.

However, when you bail out mega-banks that are run by fellow members of the old boys club using taxpayers money, that is called free enterprise. When you leave a large part of you school-aged population lagging behind with minimum skills while pandering to the offspring of the mega rich, that is called "no child left behind."

Sorry folks you either have it one way or the other. Not both.

PS Is it true that Canada will close its borders to the US after the election of Comrade Obama to prevent an influx of republicans who are fleeing the ills of socialism? Will Mexico follow the same course of action, closing the border to illegal immigrants swarming across the Rio Grande?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But why take any risk? vote McCain.

LOL yes thats right....with McCaine you know exactly what you get, more Bush policies (aka endless war, devalued dollar, diminishing US allies, unaccountability, and further dismantling of US constitution). That is, at least until Palin takes over when McCain's melanoma reactivates. Then you get: http://www.palinaspresident.us/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sushisake: I doth protest - Not true! Did you just make that up to score points? :-)

Eh, I might have stretched the truth a little... ;)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain has his work cut out for him this week.

Will we see the incredible resurrection of Rev. Jeremiah Wright? McCain himself is supposedly against this although most of his base is pleading with him to bring out the big guns. He may have good reasons for this though. It's old news and Palin has an equally wacky preacher who Obama may bring up and that might get more coverage. Also, Todd Palin belonged to a political party that wants Alaska to secede from the United States. With Palin talking about the "pro-America" parts of the country, McCain probably doesn't want a national discussion this week about whether Alaska is one of those parts. So he may have a implicit understanding with Obama about keeping it a bit civil this week.

Who knows?

But McCain needs to do something dramatic this week.

Haha!

www.electoral-vote.com/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

caveman lawyer: If [China] went pure capitalist and started polluting on a per capita basis on the level of the U.S. , gosh, the planet would be doomed.

Um...China's rise is largely dependent on coal which is doing massive damage to the environment and killing an average of 13 miners a day. But it's cheap so they're using it. Google "china" and "coal" and check it out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The next President needs to be one that keeps Congress in check instead of handing it a blank one.

For me the choice is pretty clear as to who that one is in this race.

McCain will be using his pen to veto all the pork Reid and Pelosi will send his way, Obama will use that pen to sign the blank check and say "Fill in any amount later".

I know Obama would be great in restoring our tattered Foreign relations and will go along way in moving the U.S forward in that area. But I didn't and wouldn't for vote for a Guy just to make France happy. I voted for the guy that I think is going to best for keeping America the land of opportunity instead of one who after I really took a hard look at his tax plan and record, whats to turn into the land of give me a living because I deserve it instead.

My opinion and I did not come to it lightly. I did my soul searching on both men and I voted what I think is best for my country. And for the record I understand totally why others have and will vote for Obama as they also feel he is best for the country.

Our philosphy is different that is all. I respect yours, respect mine and then maybe we will achieve that mystical unity that we all seem to yearn for right now as a Nation after the Bush disaster.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course mccain's is going to get hosed. What do people expect?

He's run such a slipshod campaign, every new day a new debacle crops up!

McCain Tackles Obama on "Spread the Wealth"

The McCain campaign apparently has a new theme this week: attacking Obama for wanting to "spread the wealth."

But it is not clear what that really means. Many Republicans have bitterly opposed the federal income tax since the 16th amendment was passed in 1913. Is McCain going to repeal the federal income tax? If so, how does he plan to finance the government?

Or does he mean that the difference between the top rate of 39.6% under Bill Clinton and the top rate of 36% under George Bush is the difference between communism and capitalism? The purpose of the progressive federal income tax is to spread the wealth. That Democrats have supported a progressive income tax for decades is hardly news. Does McCain want to keep the tax but make it a flat tax (a la Steve Forbes)? No word on this.

It seems this is just another desperate attempt to attack Obama rather than being a serious policy proposal for tax reform and it comes awfully late in the game. If McCain wanted to run on a platform of a flat tax, he certainly has had the opportunity, but until now he didn't bring up the subject.

www.politico.com

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Recent article from the LA Times on Obama....might surprise both sides.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-goldberg28-2008oct28,0,6803276.column

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind - "The next President needs to be one that keeps Congress in check instead of handing it a blank one."

Funny, we never heard you saying that when the GOP-controlled Congress kept handing GWB blank check after blank check to fund the Iraq war right from the start.

Was handing out blank checks somehow OK then but is not OK now?

Explain, please....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind - "McCain will be using his pen to veto all the pork Reid and Pelosi will send his way, Obama will use that pen to sign the blank check and say "Fill in any amount later".

ha ha! you really are a riot today :-)

In case you missed it, a lot of the pork Dems have been adding to recent war and bailout bills have been for things like winter heating costs for low income people, extensions of unemployment benefits.

All the while Bush and the neocons were screaming out to get funding purely for W-A-R, w-a-r and more w-a-r.

As has always been the case, in particular since bush started his insane little war, is that Dems want to spend money in America; bush and the GOP want to spend money on Iraqis.

And last time I checked (Sailwind, feel free to correct me if I am wrong), the president of the US is elected to represent Americans, not foreigners.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heh, looks like the GOP are going to lose Florida, too :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

There is nothing in Obama's background that suggests he is serious about protecting Israel.

And there's nothing in Obama's background to suggest that he isn't.

Nice of you to remain true to form though, and again drag out your usual doom-and-gloom scenarios. I particularly liked the extra touch with calling Senator Obama by his middle name, Hussein, as if a person’s name was sufficient evidence for an indictment. Beautiful and sad.

If your reasoning skills are even half as impressive as your punctuation skills, then I’d wager America has much more to worry about from the GOP’s more rabid supporters than simple stubbornness.

Still, I wouldn't have felt complete today without one of the GOP faithful bringing his or her daily predictions of death, destruction, and mayhem to each and every political discussion about McCain and Obama. I’m happy to say that that garbage hasn't floated since it was first introduced by the yahoos over in McCain's sadly unprepared campaign HQ, and it isn't about to gain any credence now. But thanks for playing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain looks sadder every day. Can't he dream up some new angle?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heh, when mccain fumbles back to Arizona next Wednesday after the historic defeat of the GOP, he will no doubt rue his seemingly brilliant yet stunningly stupid decision to pick Sarah Palin as his running mate.

On the contrary, "In the two months since Barack Obama asked him to join the Democratic ticket, Joe Biden, by all objective measures, has been a major plus for the Illinois senator.

He has brought genuine foreign policy gravitas. He has connected with blue-collar voters in places like Pennsylvania and West Virginia. He has been cited as a key reason for endorsing the Democratic ticket by editorial boards and GOP-leaning foreign policy hawks. His poll numbers dwarf Sarah Palin’s: He has a 60 percent favorable rating versus Palin's 44 percent in a Pew Research Center poll released Oct. 21.

In the vice presidential debate, he was so disciplined and in control that for the first half-hour, he actually seemed subdued — a word never before used in the same sentence with the name Joe Biden."

Above quote from: www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/15046.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow, looks like the GOP are already betting on defeat -

Conservatives plan secret post-election strategy session

"Two days after next week's election, top conservatives will gather at the Virginia weekend home of one of the movement's most prominent members to begin a conversation about their role in the GOP and how best to revive a party that may be out of power at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue next year."

More: www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/1008/Conservatives_plan_secret_postelection_strategy_session.html?showall

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib, I know China pollutes massively, but I maintain that they would be even worse if they emulated the U.S. That's all. But some here think capitalism is the solution to everything even while their favorite politicians go socialist on them.

Moderator: Stay on topic please. Neither China nor pollution are relevant to this discussion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As has always been the case, in particular since bush started his insane little war, is that Dems want to spend money in America; bush and the GOP want to spend money on Iraqis.

Pork is still pork though, but its never labeled "pork". It can be labeled "arms for Iraqis" or it can be labeled "alms for Americans" and either could be pork. You have to watch where the money goes. I cannot say anything about either McCain's or Obama's record on that. --Cirroc

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CavemanLawyer,why calls each other fool or stupid or anything like that when you are not Obama's head or Obama's brain? You think you know what other people really think,with out any doubt? if you do, you are either very naive or very mad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I cannot say anything about either McCain's or Obama's record on that.

I can. Except below.

He's emphasizing the issue more lately as he tries to wrest away from Sen. Barack Obama the potent mantle of "candidate of change." McCain says he and running mate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would bring a true change in the way Washington works, as demonstrated by their opposition to the time-honored tradition of pork-barrel spending.

A PolitiFact review of McCain's attacks on Democratic nominee Obama, as well as McCain's boasts about his own record on pork, finds that the Arizona senator is largely on solid ground. There is a clear distinction between McCain and Obama on earmarks in federal spending bills, the traditional form in which Congress authorizes pork spending, even if McCain is often a bit too generous in describing his own record.

The latest instance comes in remarks McCain made at a rally in Tampa on Sept. 16. McCain said: "I have never asked for a single earmark, pork-barrel project for my state of Arizona. Sen. Obama has asked for $932-million in earmarks, literally one million dollars for every day that he’s been in Congress." McCain had made nearly the identical claim just a week ago in mailer that is now circulating in Florida. "Obama has requested $1-million in pork barrel spending for every working day he has been in the Senate," it says, while "John McCain has never sought a single dollar."

The details on both of these claims are easy to track down.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/sep/16/mccains-pork-project/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sailwind, if john mccain keeps shrieking on about how he never authorizes delivery of pork, how does he explain his strong backing of the porl-laden bailout bill (that he never really understood but voted for anyway) earlier this month?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“You are such a welcoming and patriotic state,” Palin said. “I know we have many patriots in the crowd today.”

Does anyone really buy this mumbo jumbo?

I read a comment last week along the lines of that john mccain is banking on the ignorance and stupidity of his supporters to get him into the presidency.

If that's what he really said, it sadly says almost too much about GOP supporters...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Earmarks are not the problem. Eliminating earmarks will not change the magnitude of the problem. Sure, eliminating them would make a contribution--but it would help like giving up cigarettes helps to pay the mortgage when you don't have a job. We have to look for solutions elsewhere.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ROFLMAO!!

The john mccain website actually uses the phrase "team of mavericks"!

"Time and time again this team of mavericks has stood up, taken on tough issues and delivered. They're the real deal. They have a clear record that can deliver results, not just rhetoric that delivers votes."

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :-)

Oh, and be sure you don't miss the john mccain economic plan (all 35 words of it)-

"John McCain has a comprehensive economic plan that will create millions of good American jobs, (<-- gotta love it!) ensure our nation's energy security, get the government's budget and spending practices in order, and bring relief to American consumers."

More reasons why john mccain won't win on Nov. 4th here:

www.johnmccain.com/Undecided/WhyMcCain.htm

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry, some text was cut off there -

Oh, and be sure you don't miss the john mccain economic plan (all 35 words of it) -

"John McCain has a comprehensive economic plan that will create millions of good American jobs (-- you've gotta love it!), ensure our nation's energy security, get the government's budget and spending practices in order, and bring relief to American consumers."

More reasons why john mccain won't win on Nov. 4th here:

www.johnmccain.com/Undecided/WhyMcCain.htm

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Can someone tell John and Sarah that the game is over? I mean it's all over!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is completely madness here, since when McCain's supporters all become ignorance, stupid etc...(all "lovable" adjective) and Obama's supporters suddenly become genious ,intelligent, know-all very smart people? there is a theory that Obama will definitely win this election not because he is good, but because somebody has to take the blame for the hardships on American people in the next four years.And Obama is perfect choice.Believe it or not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi,

Sailwind, if john mccain keeps shrieking on about how he never authorizes delivery of pork, how does he explain his strong backing of the porl-laden bailout bill (that he never really understood but voted for anyway) earlier this month?

I've explained my position and reasoning as to why I finally went with McCain. I'm sorry if you do not find them acceptable or wish to try change it in some manner. I did my research looked at all the issues that are important to me, weighed the pro and con's of each candidate. I did not come to my vote easily. I tried in my own Sailwind way to show all J.T readers my thinking at each stage of this campaign.

I've never hidden the fact that I tilt right but I have also never hidden the fact that I like Obama on one level and have never disparged the man. As opposed to many on both the left and right who's hobby it seems to be how many times they can call McCain a senile old goat that crashes airplanes, or that Obama is some kind of radical Muslim.

I also have been appalled at how the Media has given Obama pretty much a free pass this campaign. I turned away from him after Joe the plumber asked a question that I really have never heard him answer before. How exactly will his tax plan effect me and my future.

So I dug deeper into Obama and did what the Media really never did. I actually vetted him myself. And I found that I really didn't like what I saw after looking at his social plans and tax agenda. They don't square with my philosphy of Government. The simple philosphy that I want Government out of pocket and out of my life as much as possible and let me soar or fail on my merits.

I can't square that with Obama's vision of Government. I said this earlier I'll say it again. I respect those who views differ from mine and understand how they came to them. I have also come to my views through the same prism that they did. Our life's experiences, mine was I was never owed a life had to earn it instead. ( I made the mistake as a cocky young man at 16 all those years ago of telling my hard-working Father "He owed me" because I was his Son.........The response he gave back has molded my philosphy about self-reliance all these years, Sailwind learned what life is really like that day, and boy he never forgot it. I don't recommend that course of action to any teeenagers out there if your reading this).

Sushi, respect my vote as I do you yours.

Thanks

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tclh: "there is a theory that Obama will definitely win this election not because he is good, but because somebody has to take the blame for the hardships on American people in the next four years.And Obama is perfect choice.Believe it or not."

Qutie the opposite, my friend. Obama is winning MUCH of what he is winning because many people that otherwise might not vote for him are sick of the hardships brought upon them by GWB and the Republican party, and are blaming McCain/Palin for that. Obama will, when he wins, inherit the largest US defecit in history, as well as two wars and the economic crisis currenlty going on, and will as such automatically be blamed for a lot of it when there is no miraculous solution, but he's not at all going to win the office BECAUSE people think he needs to take the fall for problems in the US.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

the punditry admits they want obama to win.

what do people expect mccain to say in response to that?

use your brains.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Imperium: "...the punditry admits they want obama to win."

Actually, not just the pundits, but many even in the GOP want him to win and/or have openly admitted they are going to vote for him. What do you expect McCain to say in response to THAT?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“You are such a welcoming and patriotic state,” Palin said. “I know we have many patriots in the crowd today.”

Which means there were some non-patriots. I sincerely hope she weeded out this dangerous element.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nessie: No kidding, eh? The usual, "If you plan to vote for us you are a patriot" crap. Obama hit this kind of logic up and proved he is the better candidate when he stated that, "I believe you are ALL patriots, and you are ALL real Americans!" The latter of course is exclusive and what has come to be typical negative campaigning by McCain/Palin, while the latter is inclusive and serves to unite everyone in a positive manner.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Doh! I mean the FORMER is exlusive and hwat has come to be typical negative... etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind,

"McCain says he and running mate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin would bring a true change in the way Washington works, as demonstrated by their opposition to the time-honored tradition of pork-barrel spending..."

And yet, McCain brings Sarah Palin on board, a politician who HAS championed pork-barrel spending for her state of Alaska in the form of the a $442-million Gravina Island Bridge project. Excerpt below:

In 2006, Palin ran for governor with a "build-the-bridge" plank in her platform, saying she would "not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project [...] into something that's so negative." Palin criticized the use of the word "nowhere" as insulting to local residents and urged speedy work on building the infrastructure "while our congressional delegation is in a strong position to assist."

It kind of sends mixed messages, don't you think?

The simple fact that McCain chose to bring Palin aboard as his running mate, when she very clearly does NOT espouse most of McCain's moderate views perfectly illustrates how far from change the McCain/Palin ticket really is. Their campaign is not and has never been about bringing "change" to Washington. It's been about winning, whatever it takes. That's why Palin was selected in the first place. She's a highly conservative, relatively successful FEMALE politician (probably the most blatant example of pandering here) who supports the vast majority of far right ideological platforms, including, but not limited to overturning Roe vs. Wade, which McCain opposes.

The McCain campaign has been a textbook definition of political business as usual and most people have seen right through the smokescreen.

Again, not entirely McCain's fault. I doubt very sincerely this is the campaign McCain wanted to run, but when you get into bed with dogs like his campaign strategy people, you're gonna end up with fleas. I feel bad for the Senator, but not too bad. He's an adult and a seasoned politician. He should have put his foot down from the start and put a stop to the long list of insanity that has been passed off as a national election campaign strategy. But he didn't. And here we are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Smithinjapan, when the theory says"Obama is perfect choice",it means America's political machines (political parties,media,financial bosses) chosed him (Obama).The whole thing you are seeing now is just a play which was already concluded long time ago.Ofcourse it is just a theory,may be true may be not.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Earmarks are not the problem. Eliminating earmarks will not change the magnitude of the problem. Sure, eliminating them would make a contribution--but it would help like giving up cigarettes helps to pay the mortgage when you don't have a job.

That's a wonderful analogy, SezWho! It's long forgotten that during the 2000 campaign McCain the candidate declared, "I won't take every dime of the surplus and spend it on tax cuts that mostly benefit the wealthy."

During GWB's first term he similarly opposed the Medicare prescription drug legislation for a solid reason; namely there was no means to pay for it. In short, if he'd stuck to his original position on tax cuts and held the line on unfunded domestic programs his steadfast opposition to earmarks would have been the icing on the cake of a committed deficit hawk, rather than an exercise in "fuzzy math."

McCain flip-flopped to counter Mitt Romney's tax cut proposal just as GWB's tax cuts were conceived as an alternative to those pitched by Steve Forbes in 2000. The lesson of the GWB win in 2000 is that you have to offer voters a tax cut.

Personally, I don't care if I ever see a dime under Obama's plan. I don't see how anyone can offer a tax cut (or make the existing ones permanent which would cost more) given the growth of the national debt, now over USD 10 trillion. Nor can government funding be frozen in a recession, that would make everything much worse.

It's probably unfair to McCain that the Republican Party has thrown his campaign under the bus. Some, such as Mitt Romney, are doing so for self-interested reasons. Others, such as operatives, want to salvage want they can do in the face of solid Democratic control of all three branches of government.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If you look past the smooth talk at Obama's voting record he is clearly well left of center. If you add the comments in his books about his policies you pretty much get the idea that Obama's major economic principle over the years is to re-distribute the "wealth." There is really no argument possible over Obama's historic vision. The only question is, "is he being sincere when he says all that is in the past?" His voting record in the Senate would say it isn't.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Betzee,

Thank you. I don't care about the tax cut either. From what I have been reading, either of them is going to have to raise taxes eventually if we're not going to redistribute income to ourselves from a generation that hasn't earned any yet.

However, if I may continue in the previous vein, I would say that disentangling ourselves from foreign wars and from the special budgets for them would at least be the equivalent of getting a part-time job.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I always find it curious that in the US (by some staunch Republican friends) is that apparently, the Democrats can never do anything right, and Republicans are always the best choice and vice-versa for other acquiantances.

I then draw the conclusion and ask "What is the point of having a democracy if one of the alternatives is always wrong? Wouldn't it be easier to have one party in power the whole time, considering that in your opinion the other is never right?" The usual response is something about 'democracy' and 'choice' etc.

As a non-American observer, I feel that Obama will win, going by publicity, polls and the turmoil faced by McCain and the Republicans. I also think that as far as campaigns go, Obama's has been more 'Presidential' in the sense that it has discussed issues more than McCain and has largely refrained from mud-slinging and name-calling when compared to the GOP.

Personally, I think it is just silly to call Obama a 'Socialist' - he is very far from actually being one, no matter what comments or quotes are bandied about on talk shows and forums such as this. If anything, it proves that perceptions of 'Socialism' and 'Left wing' are vastly different in the US when compared to other countries. Also, making such comments (for both sides) is intellectually insulting - it does not or refuses to consider the rich, varied and nuanced political tapestry of the USA.

Less Tabloid Campaigns and more debate and discussion, please Messrs. Obama and McCain.

KN

0 ( +0 / -0 )

ca1ic0cat - "Obama's major economic principle over the years is to re-distribute the "wealth."

Big problem here is that Republicans who criticize Obama's words in this instance are simply making up whatever meaning they think suits their Obama-bashing agenda for the day.

mccain has taken this comment and blown it out of all proportion, and perhaps telling, it hasn't done him any good at all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society. And to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn't that radical. It didn't break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, as least as it's been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted in the same way that, generally, the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, says what the states can't do to you, says what the federal government can't do to you, but it doesn't say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted." --Barack Hussein Obama---

Now what is there "out of context, SushiSake? That is pretty plain. The quote comes from an interview in 2001, if the media had shown an interest in vetting their candidate we would have heard this (and many likewise) before.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Palin: "It is not negative campaigning to call someone out on their record"

Exactly, exactly.

Proffessor: "it's all over!"

Is not! Obama still has a chance!

ca1ic0cat - Great post.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

From what I have been reading, either of them is going to have to raise taxes eventually if we're not going to redistribute income to ourselves from a generation that hasn't earned any yet.

SezWho,

Indeed. Much has been made about Obama's self-proclaimed desire "to spread the wealth around." Yet what many Americans see is an enormous amount of debt, both public and private. There's widespread recognition this is a road to national ruin.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Something else telling about the differences between the candidates in this campaign is the size of the turnouts -

mccain gets 2,000-odd thousand on a fine day.

On Oct 28th, Obama spoke to 9,000 people who waited in freezing, driving rain to hear him in Widener University in Chester, Pennsylvania (One woman at Obama's event said she applied for citizenship so she could vote for Obama - more: www.mcall.com/news/local/all-obama1028-cn,0,7420428.story)

mccain cancelled his events due to the weather.

Obama showed up to speak to the people who had waited for him.

Oh, and in another interesting tidbit of information -

Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin plans to fly back to her home in Alaska to vote in next week's election.

She may as well stay there. There's no point for her to return to Washington after she and mccain's coming loss. :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sushi:

" Something else telling about the differences between the candidates in this campaign is the size of the turnouts - "

No, that tells you about the mentality of the crowds. And if that is your measure, you should elect Madonna or Britney Spears for president. Coming to think of that, they also endorse your Messiah.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

WilliB said:

That said, there is of course still hope that some people wake up and realize that giving all parts of government to one party is not all that good an idea.

Like that's what you were saying when the Republicans were in charge of all three branches.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"it's all over!"

Sure, Proffessor, keep trying to discourage all the McCain supporters from even bothering to vote. Just remember, in 2004 John "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it" Kerry was leading in the polls right up to election day.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Kerry was leading in the polls right up to election day.

Nothing like the lead that Obama has now.

No McCain and his followers are the ones who are fooling themselves. If that discourages any Republican from voting this year for president or the numerous other offices and proposals on the ballot, it just goes to show what lousy citizens they are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No, that tells you about the mentality of the crowds. And if that is your measure, you should elect Madonna or Britney Spears for president.

Really, WilliB? In that case Britney Spears has come a long way since she said this in 2003:

Spears: "I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that."

So if she's endorsing Obama what could have turned her off Bush, the Republicans and McCain?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

yabits - When a candidate is leading in that polls, that always discourages some voters. Didn't you know that? McCain and his supporters aren't trying to "fool" anyone. McCain simply wants to encourage his supporters to turn out and vote, because this race is closer than you think.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Britney Spears: "I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that."

Not very intelligent thinking, is it? And she's supporting Obama...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "When a candidate is leading in that polls, that always discourages some voters. Didn't you know that? McCain and his supporters aren't trying to "fool" anyone. McCain simply wants to encourage his supporters to turn out and vote, because this race is closer than you think."

A relatively decent post, sarge, but still a rather naive one. The thing is, people say, "When one person is leading in the polls, it discourages some others," (when not their candidate) and then just as easily say, "When one person is leading in the polls, it encourages and relaxes them, and since their candidate is winning they don't get out and vote", etc. In other words, there are always excuses as to why someone 'loses' an election, but in the end it is the responsibility of those who have the power to vote to exercise that power/right; if they are 'discouraged' it is their own person they have to blame, and no one or no other excuse. It's laziness and irresponsibility, and they have NO right to complain about the subsequent results if they failed to get out and cast their ballot.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith ( 11:09 ) - I got no argument wit' ya there. Some of my friends have said they're not going to vote for any of the, heh, "scumbags" who are running. I told them if ya don't vote, ya can't complain about the subsequent results! You'd better believe I'll be complaining loudly if Obama wins! But I still think McCain can pull it out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I hope everybody gets a chance to watch 30 min. of non-stop Obama on television tonight. Be there or be square. Come on, all your friends are doing it. It will make you cool.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

goodDonkey - Is this the $961,000 30 minutes?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"30 minutes of non-stop Obama"

The question is, how many times will he say "Aaaaaaand"?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge

I thought I heard 3 mill for all the various outlets. It will be on cable and broadcast. I know you will want a podcast. Hopefully you can get a recording to play over and over again.

He has got the hard cash to spend. In the long run it will benefit all Americans so it is worth it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge,

I actually don't think it was true that Kerry was leading in the polls right up to election day. He might have been leading in some polls, but not very many.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.html

It seems as though Bush had the overall lead.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain is finally saying the right things in attacking Obama's tax plan as being dishonest but it's too little too late. I have been pretty disappointed with "candidate" McCain as I truly have always respected Senator McCain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sez - Yeah, you're right. It was actually pretty even. Kerry was leading in some exit polls.

I hear Obama's infomercial is really going to be an early acceptance speech, since "it's all over."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McCain, is his absolute desperation, is back now to the "Ayer's Connection" with Obama. It's truly sad to see this man go so low, when I actually respected him as a contender against bush in 2000, and as a senator following... until a few years later. I especially respected the way he bashed the bush admin. for the swift-boating tactics, etc. Needless to say, his hypocrisy has shown that he is not at all the type of stable, strong-spirited leader he needs to be to become president. He has instead proven himself to be VERY fickle, to be unable to practice what he preaches, to be a worse flip-flopper than bush, etc. Truly, truly sad.... and now he threatens to take the whole GOP down with him.

Another point he is now making is his clearly BS claim that he will 'restore freedom and democracy' to Cuba, but that he is also unwilling to engage in discussion to do so. Seems pretty clear that, as well as with Iran, then, since dialogue is not an option or word in his vocabulary, he wants war with both countries to 'spread democracy'. He's not only shooting himself in the face with the transparency in whom he's trying to appeal, but he's doubly shooting himself because, once again, he sounds 100% like bush.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith - Obama has been trying to run away from Ayers ever since he launched his political career in his living room. I must admit he's been keeping his distance pretty well up until at least now...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Britney Spears: "I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that."

Not very intelligent thinking, is it?

No. It's not. We've been trying to convince you of that for 8 years. Why is it now that you realize you shouldn't have been doing it?

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Britney Spears: "I think we should just trust our president in every decision that he makes and we should just support that." Not very intelligent thinking, is it? And she's supporting Obama...

Ironic, considering the verbal assualt the Dixie Chicks were given when they did not agree with the president.

I told them if ya don't vote, ya can't complain about the subsequent results!

A protest vote is just as valid of a vote, as any. Just don't check anything when you vote(I believe it is still counted).

So if she's endorsing Obama what could have turned her off Bush

A fishy smell.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Britney Spears: "I think we should just trust our president in every >decision that he makes and we should just support that."

Not very intelligent thinking, is it? And she's supporting Obama...

Never thought you'd imply that advocating unconditional support for George W. Bush was "not very intelligent thinking." Didn't know Britney Spears was supporting Obama though, where did you hear that? Anyway...

smith - Obama has been trying to run away from Ayers ever since he launched his political career in his living room. I must admit he's been keeping his distance pretty well up until at least now...

Back to this again, is it? To be honest, I think going after Obama for his policies is fair enough. Pointing out why your ideas for running the country are better than the other guy's is what campaigning should all be about. But this Ayers stuff is just pathetic. If it were a serious issue the Obama campaign would have been dead in the water as soon as it was first brought up. Instead all the reliable indicators point to an Obama victory. I'm guessing that a lot of people care less about Obama's connections to Ayers than they do about McCain's connection to George W. Bush.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I doubt brittney could even name the curent incumbent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Simon, I would agree that Ayers is pathetic as a person but I don't know if Ayers is pathetic as a campaign issue. Obama claims that he's just a normal centrist kind of guy who isn't a radical and isn't hiding a leftist past and leaning. His association with Ayers puts paid to the persona that Obama is claiming as he tries to become president. Obama is not a representative of the average American. He is as far to the left as Bush is to the right. Ayers is the canary in the coal mine.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Madverts said:

I doubt brittney could even name the curent incumbent.

Brittney said:

"Who was talking about an incumbent, I never said anything about no incumbent. I was talking about the President."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't expect too high of Obama, the higher fantasy you have for him the harder you will have to defend him in the next 4 years, it is a looong time.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tclh - Apparently, some Americans expected too high of Bush; the last eight, terrible years of his "reign" have been a much loooooooooooonger time.

Fact is, either Obama or McCain would be better than Bush. It's just that more Americans see Obama as the better choice of the two.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I can tell you one reason that the pundits are being fooled. Those sneaky Republicans are waiting to vote and the Democrats are voting early.

A look at early voting in key states:

Florida: About 2.6 million people have already voted in a state where absentee ballots overwhelmingly favored President Bush in the razor-thin 2000 election. Among those voting so far this year, 45 percent are registered Democrats and 39 percent Republicans.

North Carolina: About 1.6 million people have already voted — 54 percent are registered Democrats and 29 percent are Republicans. About 100,000 newly registered voters have signed up and voted at North Carolina's one-stop voting centers. Among them, Democrats outnumbered Republicans by about 2-1.

Iowa: About 340,000 people have already voted — 49 percent are registered Democrats and 29 percent are Republican.

Colorado: About 815,000 people have voted — 39 percent are registered Democrats and 37 percent are Republicans.

Nevada: About 342,000 people have already voted in Clark and Washoe Counties, which contain nearly 90 percent of the state's population. Among those voters, 53 percent are registered Democrats and 30 percent are Republicans.

New Mexico: About 111,000 people have voted in Bernalillo County, the state's largest. Among them, 55 percent are registered Democrats and 33 percent are Republicans.

Of course in Georgia you wouldn't expect them to separate the voters by party; they do it by race: Black voters make up about 35 percent of those who have already voted — a big increase from the 2004 election, when 25 percent of the state's electorate was black. Blacks voted for Obama by ratio of 9-1 in Georgia's Democratic primary this year.

facts provided by:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iXAkBilVhjbpsgAAHfgp6kGEShvwD944BQP84

Boy those tricky Republicans are really fooling us. Won't we be surprised by their antics.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge,

If it matters to you, I don't think that the election is over. I think that Obama has to be "ahead" before election day. I don't know about the 10-point lead that you have talked about, but I think that the polls don't tell the whole story. The election could be close.

I will say this, though. In my state, Obama and McCain are running pretty much dead even. McCain has a slight edge. I don't know how things will play out but this is rather shocking. My state has a lot of Democrats and frequently elects Democratic governors and Senators. However, it has voted Democratic for President only 7 times since 1860 and it last voted Democratic in 1964.

When it is all said and done, if the popular vote in my state and similar states is even close, I think McCain will be in big trouble in the electoral vote.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Another endorsement for Obama:

In a strongly worded letter, 76 of the most distinguished scientists in the country endorsed Barack Obama for president. While praising Obama's "emphasis during the campaign on the power of science and technology to enhance our nation's competitiveness," the laureates blasted the Bush administration for its disdain for science...

No doubt the crowd which disdains book larnin' will dismiss it. Yet at the same time they like to frequently point out "America's #1!" I always want to ask these folks, like, "What is your contribution?"

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Simon, I would agree that Ayers is pathetic as a person but I don't know if Ayers is pathetic as a campaign issue.

Sorry, but I think it is. McCain's team made a big thing out of it, and it appears to have had very little impact. Everyone knows the Republican viewpoint that Obama's associations reflect badly on his character, but the only people who seem to care now are committed Republican supporters who would never vote for him anyway.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites