Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
A new poll out today has McCain at 50% and Obama at 46%. All because of that damn lady who lacks all substance and experience. It really blows my mind that people consider her a viable candidate. It really does.
A new poll out today has McCain at 50% and Obama at 46%. All because of that damn lady who lacks all substance and experience. It really blows my mind that people consider her a viable candidate. It really does.
Welcome to America. Aint that Palin gal pirty? Let's vote for her.
Post by purplefuzzystuff on Sept 8, 2008 15:28:46 GMT -5
MSNBC is replacing Olbermann...apparently his commentary at the RNC was just too much.
And this whole Palin thing has turned into a monster, she's everywhere, almost as if she were running for president....Although I guess in all fairness, before she came along Obama was everywhere... But not being interested in the "milf-a-licious" aspect I would much rather see Obama on the cover of all the magazines
It really blows my mind that people consider her a viable candidate. It really does.
And it surprises me that people have grossly underestimated what this was going to do for the Republican ticket. Dismiss the evangelicals as zealots, but don't underestimate their power in this country. It's frightening.
Actually, both Keith Olbermann & Chris Matthews were pulled from the co-anchor slot in favor of David Gregory.
So I don't think it's just what Keith said.
What I've gleaned is that Brokaw wasn't happy with what appeared to be a runaway train with Olbermann and Matthews as conductors, so it was at his suggestion that they be reassigned as analysts rather than anchormen.
Post by thingsfallapart on Sept 9, 2008 11:05:43 GMT -5
I don't think so, Olbermann and Matthews were both being totally ridiculous and biased out there. Matthews especially is a piece of work. The man lives for one thing, and that's to hear the sound of his own voice. It's always about Chris Matthews.
As for Palin, I think it's remarkable that Obama and co. are being so passive in going after her. Her claims that she's a reformer and a maverick are obviously a load of BS. She's managed to energize the Republican base by being anti-abortion and supporting the teaching of creationism (hard to believe that people are still actually debating these topics...) but on issues, experience, and capability, the Democrats should hit hard and fast. In an election year where 80 percent of voters think the country is headed in the wrong direction, I'm shocked that the Democrats are going to let McCain get away with picking essentially a female version of George Bush as his VP. McCain claims that he's going to clean up the Republican party but yet this is the best he can come up with. I'm not sure what they're waiting around for.
Hill-dog is back to pissing me off with this whole Palin thing. She's the one that should be out there attacking Palin. If you have Biden or Obama go after her too hard, they'll be accused of sexism. Hillary can go after her and mock the fact that they expect to pick up her voters simply because Palin's a woman and not because she's the most qualified. Maybe she will in the near future, but I'm still thinking that Hillary is just paying Obama lip service and that she really doesn't want him to win to better her chances in 2012. Until she proves me wrong, I still see her as a snake in the grass.
I expected Palin to energize the religious right, but this election was never about the far edges of the parties. It's about the middle. And what is shocking to me is that the middle, the independents are flocking to McCain now, especially woman. There's been like a 20 point swing in white women voters over to McCain's side. That's absolutely insane.
Post by thingsfallapart on Sept 9, 2008 11:24:01 GMT -5
I don't think Hillary has a dog in this fight anymore. I'd have to agree that she isn't exactly pulling whole-heartedly for Obama to win.
I don't think that it's independent women who are now going to Obama, the article that I read only called them white women (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/08/AR2008090801825.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008090801842&s_pos=). And again, I think this is because Palin has energized the evangelical vote. A lot of these people were planning on staying home in November. This was evidenced by the fact that several traditionally red states, like Virginia and Montana, are now close to being toss-ups. Not so much anymore.
What I read was that Obama was +8 with the white women voters and now McCain is +12. That to me says that they're independents or at least these so called "Regan democrats" that everyone keeps talking about. I saw another poll with people's approval rating of Palin. Democrats in the 20's, Republicans in the 70's and Independents in the 50's. That's just really surprising to me. I don't see her appeal at all to independents, but all indications show that she doesn have quite an appeal.
Which brings me back to Obama's past comments about people "clinging" to guns and religion. Like I've said before, it's totally true and this just proves his point. I just wish he wouldn't have said "cling" cause I think he could make that point again. Why do people vote social issues with the economy and war and our future and possibly our very existence, at least in terms of global influence, hanging in the balance. Nah. Palin kills moose an goes to church. That seems to be enough for most people.
Thank god Obama reacted the way he did today to the whole "lipstick on a pig" remark. The McCain camp's reaction is almost as absurd as him picking Palin for VP. They can't talk about issues, cause they have nothing to talk about. Shell games. That's all they got.
If you're black and from outside the lower 48 states you need 2 years and 4 major speeches for the country to get you to know you and they still call you "exotic." If you're a white woman from outside the lower 48 states it takes a 36 minute speech to get the country to think you're "one of us."
The Obama camp needs to be more proactive and start controlling the message. McCain is dominating in that respect. Its always McCain attacks/Obama defends. It needs to be the other way around.
Post by mojoworks on Sept 10, 2008 16:38:04 GMT -5
Palin will implode. Once she starts answering(instead of ducking) tough questions and faces Biden in a debate, her extreme politics, lack of experience, and intellectual dishonesty will become apparent.
John McCain keeps inferring his party is the only one that can fix what his party has done.
Strange! And indeed a very odd thought process.
The hypocrisy is beyond bearable.
Brings to mind Leonard Pitts' column last week.
"If you're a regular here, you've heard me rant from time to time about intellectual dishonesty. By this, I mean more than just your garden variety lie. No, to be intellectually dishonest means to argue that which you know to be untrue and to substitute ideology for intellect to the degree that you'll do violence to language and logic rather than cross the party line."
And then there's this comment that McCain made last month about the Minnesota bridge collapse:
“Maybe if we had done it right, maybe some of that money would have gone to inspect those bridges and other bridges around the country,” McCain said at a campaign stop in Ankeny, Iowa on Aug. 4, 2007. “Maybe the 200,000 people who cross that bridge every day would have been safer than spending $233 million of your tax dollars on a bridge in Alaska to an island with 50 people on it.”
Just keep in mind that if you see one, fault might be with the stations, not the candidates. It has happened before where the station doesn't fully read the traffic instruction.