GOP says Palin rolled; polls back Biden
Associated Press
Published October 2, 2008 at 6:24 a.m.
Updated October 3, 2008 at 12:51 p.m.
Chip Somodevilla © Getty
Democratic vice presidential candidate U.S. Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) and Republican vice presidential candidate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin take part in the vice presidential debate at the Field House of Washington University's Athletic Complex on October 2, 2008 in St. Louis, Missouri. The highly anticipated showdown between the two vice-presidential candidates will be their only debate before the election.
Who did the best in the vice presidential debate?
Photo by J. Scott Applewhite © AP
Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., left, and Republican candidate Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin take the stage at the start of a vice presidential debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Mo., Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008.
ST. LOUIS — Republicans John McCain and Sarah Palin today played up her debate performance as polls showed voters judging her Democratic rival, Joe Biden, to be the winner of the only vice presidential face-off of the campaign.
"It was a lot of fun. It was a great opportunity to get to speak directly to Americans," Palin said in an interview with Fox News.
McCain told supporters at a town-hall meeting in Pueblo: "You know, I almost felt a little sorry last night for my old friend Joe Biden. She did a magnificent job."
The GOP's presidential nominee drew cheers when he declared, "Viva la Barracuda!"
Two quick polls indicated that Biden fared better in the debate.
A CBS News/Knowledge Networks Poll found that 46 percent of uncommitted voters who watched the debate thought Biden won, with 21 percent siding with Palin. A CNN poll found respondents judging Biden the winner by a margin of 51 percent to 36 percent but calling Palin more likable by 54 percent to Biden's 36 percent.
In the 90-minute forum broadcast Thursday night from Washington University in St. Louis, Palin was under intense pressure to show basic competence on issues facing the next president after a series of embarrassing television interviews called into question her readiness for high office.
For the most part she appeared confident and folksy, but she also sidestepped certain questions, pivoting at times to talking points and generalities.
In the debate, Palin tried to portray Biden and Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama as obsessed with the failures of President Bush even as she acknowledged his administration was responsible for "huge blunders" in the war and elsewhere.
Biden largely avoided direct challenges to Palin and instead worked to undermine McCain, who has sought throughout the campaign to distance himself from an unpopular president.
The Delaware senator repeatedly noted that McCain had sided with Bush on crucial issues, from launching the war in Iraq to tax policies that widened the income disparity between rich and poor.
"He's been a maverick on some issues, but he has been no maverick on the things that matter to people's lives," Biden said.
On other topics:
—Palin criticized the Democratic ticket for opposing offshore oil drilling. Biden chided McCain for voting against proposals to expand the development of alternative energy sources.
—Palin restated her controversial view that climate change is largely due to cyclical changes in the earth's atmosphere and not primarily caused by human behavior. Biden disagreed, saying climate change was caused by man.
—Biden reaffirmed his position that it was "patriotic" for people who earn more than $250,000 to pay additional taxes. Obama's tax plan would cut taxes for about 90 percent of Americans, Biden said. Palin called his position a "redistribution of wealth principle," but Biden shot back that fairness was the issue.
—Both said they supported partnership rights for gays and lesbians but opposed same-sex marriage.
—Palin argued that the Democrats' plan for the war in Iraq "is a white flag of surrender." Biden defended Obama's vote in May 2007 not to fund military operations there unless a timeline was set for withdrawal, even though he sharply criticized the Illinois senator's vote at the time.
October 2, 2008
6:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Acemon writes:
What buzz? It's going to be like shooting tied-down rabbits. Biden, for all his pontificating, will put her career into the back seat. It's not gonna be pretty, folks. Bet on her crying by the end. I feel sad for Sarah Palin, but she's the one who jumped into a harsh environment.
October 2, 2008
7:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
While she is in St Louis doing this debate who is watching for the Russians to to invade Alaska. Boy I won't sleep tonight. "I want her on that wall. I need her on that wall."
October 2, 2008
7:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Guys (Dan Caplis, etc) - after we get done insisting that she WON THE DEBATE!!!!! and how mean/rude/condescending/unfair Ifill and Biden were, can we just admit that she's taking the ticket down and find a graceful (all right - that's too much ask - how about "plausibly deniable?") way to get s.o. else in the VP spot? Better late than never. McCain deserves better than to let this one mistaken judgement ruin a fine public service career.
October 2, 2008
7:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
JB writes:
"...she appeared unable to cite a Supreme Court decision with which she disagreed while saying many decisions had divided Americans. McCain and other Republicans criticized such questions as "gotcha journalism..."
How is that "gotcha" journalism? It's a valid, fair and easy question. Couric asked Biden the same question and he answered it!
As for the debate... I'm hoping Biden does well, but I am not going to count on it being the "bloodbath" othere people think it will be. I suspect that Palin might be intentionally setting the bar low right now, and is going to come out swinging tonight. I can't imagine that she is truely as uninformed as she appears in interviews. Seriously, most high-school kids could answer some of those questions better than she has. She did do well in ALaskan politics...
October 2, 2008
8 a.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
The moderator is making money writing a book favorable to Barack Obama.
Move on...nothing to see.
/s
October 2, 2008
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
Logical writes:
Why is the left so intent on trying to expose Palin's lack of national experience, when their own presidential candidate has a serious lack of experience, also? Palin has been focusing on her own state (as Governor, that's what she should be doing) while Obama has missed most of the votes in the Senate. Obama has not done his job, but gets a pass from the left. I would rather have my least-experienced candidate be at the vp level, and not the top of the ticket.
October 2, 2008
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
Miss_Kitty_Kat_Girl writes:
Palin will deliver more fodder for SNL writers, so please, keep it up Painlin.
October 2, 2008
8:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
TruthHurts writes:
There is no winning and losing to this debate...... the way it is structured Biden and Palin will simply answer questions with specific well thought out answers or they won't. If either uses rote memorized answers for repeated questions it will be obvious and if either simply does not know the answer they should just say so.....
Without being trite it will be the American people who will win because we will know who can knowledgeably think on their feet to answer the questions and who cannot.
October 2, 2008
8:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
TruthHurts writes:
Logical
So long as you are keeping score and spreading more Republican misinformation and talking points...McCain has not voted in the senate since April missing 173 votes.... Obama has not voted in the Senate since July missing 137....
Don't let the facts get in your way......keep spinning.....
And if the position of Governor is the deciding factor of qualifications I might point out that George Bush had the same experience and more of it.......as Sarah Palin says herself....Thanks but no Thanks......
And finally, I hate to point out that an entire political party, after 16 months of debates and primaries picked the Democratic Candidate..... your VP pick was made by one man. Not exactly the same vetting process but you did do a good job spinning.
October 2, 2008
8:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
kc02 writes:
Well, she may not have been able to name a court decision she disagreed with, but she at least knows that FDR wasn't the President in 1929, and that he didn't go on television to address the American people.
I don't suppose we'll see any Saturday Night Live skits on that one, though, will we?
October 2, 2008
8:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
enough321 writes:
Sarah Palin is a woman. Gwen Ifill is a woman. So, Gwen Ifill has a conflict of interest in seeing that a woman succeeds to the Vice Presidency of the United States. I can't believe that the Republicans let this blatant, sexist, conflict of interest to be created. I demand a transgender-insider-outsider-overeducated-redneck-liberal-conservative-mainstreet-wallstreet moderator.
October 2, 2008
8:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
We need to get Palin on with her career - "Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader" and "Dancing with the Stars" are calling.....
October 2, 2008
8:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
TruthHurts writes:
KC...
Do you really think not knowing the exact year of Roosevelt's speech is the same as knowing nothing about the Supreme Court.....? Why is it when the Republicans cannot answer it is a gotcha question and when the Dems make a mistake it is because they are unqualified. I guarantee you Biden knows Supreme Court decisions and he knows the names of the Papers he reads. And we know for sure he knew Roosevelt was one of our Presidents who served during a depression.
Are you confident Sarah Palin knows any of that?
October 2, 2008
8:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
urnfndbag writes:
People are focusing on Palin's lack of experience rather than Obama because Obama is informed and can hold an intelligent conversation on the issues. There is a difference between lack of experience coupled with a fundamental understanding of the issues and just plain lack of experience. Palin's inability to answer basic questions extemporaneously show a lack of comprehension of even the simplest of issues that a President should understand.
October 2, 2008
8:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
urnfndbag writes:
for Biden's part, not knowing Presidential tenures or when TV was developed is not the same thing as not knowing SCOTUS cases, or admitting decisions made in office are based on religion, or rambling off some incomprehensible answer about the economy and healthcare during an economic crisis.
October 2, 2008
8:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
MBR693 writes:
Boy, I heard that Palin didn't even know that Budenny was one of Stalin's generals during World War II, and she thought that the atomic mass of oxygen was 16.0000 instead of 15.9994. Wow. Biden is going to really clean house tonight.
October 2, 2008
8:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
SimpleMind writes:
For anyone who still thinks that Sarah Palin is "qualified" based on the speech she delivered at the RNC and the speeches she has delivered on the campaign trail, let me remind you that they are written, not by her, but by some of the very same speech writers that W had and has writing for him. When Bush reads a teleprompter, he comes off as semi-genuine and almost intelligent. Palin does the same.
Look for tonights debate to be fairly even when it comes to lead questions, but the follow-up questions will be where Biden pulls away. I don't see a bloodbath occurring like others might, but I do think that Palin will fail decisively when pulled away from her preset talking points.
October 2, 2008
8:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
MBR693 - I would be shocked if Palin could tell me more about Stalin than any little kid could. As for oxygen, could she pass a high school chem test? Even close?
October 2, 2008
9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
ihaveaconscience writes:
dilligaf: that was a hoot! thank you for bringing a chuckle to my day.
October 2, 2008
9:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
UNV_ME writes:
SheikYurBooty writes: We need to get Palin on with her career - "Are You Smarter than a Fifth Grader"
Don't you mean "Are You smarter than a Cheese Grater"?
This Palin person is dumber than a box of rocks.
October 2, 2008
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
sundaychild67 writes:
You Republicans are funny! Of course since none of you could ever be bothered to watch PBS and see what a professional Gwen Ifill is, you're so sure that her mighty powers will cast Palin in a bad light. How about just admit what Jack Cafferty said last week about her after the Couric interview, "She would be one 72-year-old's heartbeat from the presidency. And if that doesn't scare the hell out of you, it should!"
The woman cannot answer a simple question. How on earth could she possibly be expected to perform the duties of Vice President, which is also President of the Senate. And God forbid, assume the presidency if something ever happened to McCain?
This is one independent who was leaning toward McCain, now strongly in favor of Obama/Biden. We're in way too deep of a mess, and there is no way McCain/Palin can start to clean it up!
October 2, 2008
9:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Fireball writes:
SimpleMind: That is a very appropriate moniker; have you ever heard Obama without the teleprompter? He is no better than Bush, stuttering, stammering, long ahhhhs and annnnds, until he finally figures out that he needs to say what you want to hear.
October 2, 2008
9:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
I like to know how many times Palin will have to say "Gwen I'll have to get back to you on that one"
October 2, 2008
9:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Motormouth writes:
Boy, it's amazing how hateful and spiteful the lugnut lefty's are when it comes to Sarah (well actually anyone who isn't a dumocrut is the ememy!!). When you think about it why are they so hostle and quick to find fault? Why do they choose to degrate and find fault before the debate has even begun! Could it be that the liberals are shaking in their boots?.... could they, deep down inside, be a bit worried???? Yeah...the truth is the truth even if they yell and scream that it's not. You've got to love it... I just can't stop laughing, this election has been something I won't soon forget!! and if NOBAMA wins I really can't wait to see all the incredible things he's going to do to save the world, all wonderful changes that will occur as a result of him getting in office. Like his wife said he's PERFECT!!! Can't wait for the SAVIOR of the Dumacrats to perform wonders beyond our belief!!! Yea right.
October 2, 2008
9:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
Nobama writes:
Now let me get this straight. Is this the same Joe Biden who has been commuting from Deleware to DC for more than 30 years to do his same old Senate work? The same one who was re-re-re-reelected with just over 130,000 total votes from the good citizens of Deleware? The same one who couldn't get more than a handful of votes from Democrats in how many previous Presidential primiaries? The same one who plagierized his speech? One of 16 Democrat Senate Committee chairs who average 72 years of age? The same ones who are going to help Obama "change" the way Washington works? I'm pretty sure he IS the one. Funny how you Liberals can rewrite a person's biography in such glowing terms when it suits your agenda.
October 2, 2008
9:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
sundaychild67 write
"The woman cannot answer a simple question. How on earth could she possibly be expected to perform the duties of Vice President, which is also President of the Senate. And God forbid, assume the presidency if something ever happened to McCain?"
You need to understand you will never get an answer from the Republicans on that. Their only response will be comparing her to Obama. That is their favorite and only response.
October 2, 2008
9:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
Nobama
Thank you!!! You just proved my point on my 9:34am post. Will you ever come up with a logical response by defending Palin. I know you will have to give me a Palin response and say "dilligaf I'll have to get back to you on that one"
October 2, 2008
9:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Zim writes:
Motormouth:
Unlike people like you, who couldn't care less that a group of spider monkeys were elected office as long as they were Republican, there are a great many of us who want to be assured that our leaders are not only qualified for the position, but will excel in the position and prove themselves exceptional leaders. To do this, tough questions have to be asked and candidates on both sides of the aisle heavily scrutinized. Your brand of thinking brought us George W. Bush for eight years. This country, and its citizens, deserve far better.
If Sarah cannot handle the scrutiny nor the pressure, she is not qualified for the position.
October 2, 2008
9:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Zim writes:
RE: "Too bad McCain and his campaign didn't research about the book. It's been part of the Random House catalog for months."
Cynical, I was thinking the same thing. No one figured this out until a couple of days ago? Had the McCain camp mentioned this far earlier, a new moderator could have been assigned and prepared without the last-minute hysterics.
October 2, 2008
10:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
UNV_ME writes:
Palin = Deer in the headlights
October 2, 2008
10:07 a.m.
Suggest removal
enough321 writes:
Nobama, let's get something else straight. Is this the same Sarah Palin that was elected governor two years ago with 112,230 total votes (out of 455,158 registered voters)? The same Sarah Palin that accepted over $10,000 worth of graft gifts while in office? The same Sarah Palin that wields government power to try to resolve family disputes? The same Sarah Palin that lied about the bridge to nowhere? The same Sarah Palin that can't complete a sentence unless it is a scripted, snarky insult? The same Sarah Palin that attended 5 different colleges and changed her major from business to journalism because business is just too darn difficult to understand? The same Sarah Palin that is dangerously inexperienced, lacks the intelligence of a bag of rocks, and yet aggressively pushes a theocracy without the slightest knowledge of legal precedent? I'm pretty sure that's the one.
October 2, 2008
10:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
Nobama writes:
dilligaf writes:
Nobama
Thank you!!! You just proved my point on my 9:34am post. Will you ever come up with a logical response by defending Palin. I know you will have to give me a Palin response and say "dilligaf I'll have to get back to you on that one"
Who decided I was supposed to defend Palin? How does my criticism of Biden "prove your point". I had no intention of defending Palin. Who elected you as moderator of the forum? I think Palin was a weak choice, but I do like her and think she has a good future in Conservative politics.
My only point, which I believe I logically made, is that Biden is nothing but a good old entrenched Senator, who has nothing going for him. But, somehow, he's now become an agent for "change".
October 2, 2008
10:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Nobama writes:
enough321,
Yes, and it's the same Palin who enjoys an 80% popularity rating with her constituents. Of course, you won't find many bleeding heart Liberals in the State of Alaska.
October 2, 2008
10:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
Nobama writes:
And, yes, diligaf, McCain is ALSO a "good old entrenched Senator". He wouldn't have been my choice, either. Problem is: I can only choose between him, a semi-Conservative old guy, and an outright Liberal Socialist.
October 2, 2008
10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
"it's the same Palin who enjoys an 80% popularity rating with her constituents."
actually that's not true.
since she put in her "performances" on national tv, palin's ratings at home have plummetted.
October 2, 2008
10:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
I agree with cynical_one et all. What the heck? Can't any of you McCain/Palin supporters defend them at all? Just a little? It's like you're going into battle with a sword and nothing else. You don't win too many battles/games/whatever with just an offense and zero defense.
October 2, 2008
10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Biff writes:
Gees...the liberals on this site just crack me up....
October 2, 2008
10:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
chickenlittle1234 writes:
cynical_one - thanks for the facts from factcheck.org and Politifact. I heard McCain interviewed on Morning Edition yesterday, claiming the same thing - he's 100% accurate in his ads. When pressed, he stood by his statement and said that factcheck.org essentially misinterpreted his ads. Of course, facts like these will be roundly ignored by rabid McCain supporters, but such is life. What's even more interesting is, in apparent response, the McCain campaign continues to spout the same lies, only louder. I suspect the increase in volume is in direct correlation to his dropping poll numbers. I expect I'll be needing ear plugs soon to prevent my hearing from further damage.
October 2, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
cassidy22 writes:
The repubs crack me up too.
Are they going after Ifill now, so they can use her as an excuse if/when Palin bombs the debate?
I am very interested in how tonight is going to go... it could go either way. But I'm betting Biden is more prepared.
October 2, 2008
10:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
yep...more prepared, more intelligent, more educated, more experienced, better read, and taller too.
October 2, 2008
11:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
MrCrush writes:
If you vote for Obama:
Your taxes will go up across the board.
You will be inviting terrorism to our soil again.
The economy will get much worse.
The borders will open even wider.
You're accepting Anti-American behavior in your president.
You're electing the most liberal person in Congress.
You’re electing a man who voted against Wall Street reform in 2006.
He also voted against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reform in 2006.
You’re electing someone who financially supports national voter fraud.
He brings a First Lady who HATES America.
He brings the influence of a Anti-American preacher/mentor.
He brings the influence of a longtime America hater and terrorist.
PERIOD!
McCain/Palin 2008
October 2, 2008
11:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Nobama writes:
cynical_one,
Are you done yet? Take a deep breath and back off the key board. Why do you insist upon pushing the anti-McCain theme, when the issue most Conservatives support is anti-Obama, hence my name, Nobama. I hate the political system that has produced the candidates we must choose from But, I also hate the whole idea of socialism. It's interesting that you admit your support for it. I respect any Liberal who will admit what they stand for. But, I have some fairly unique insight into the workings of the Federal government, and there are NO solutions to our economic, health, education, or welfare problems that will ever be provided by the Federal government, unless you embrace socialism, including nationalizing whole capitalistic systems. Do you want to change our form of government? The Feds do a few things effectively, but nothing efficiently. People who think Obama will provide these solutions singlehandedly as President are just naive and gullible. I wish Obama was a Conservative, who believed in limited interference from the Federal government. I could vote for him. I agree that things need to be changed. He can't do it. The only way it will change is if the Senate and House seniority systems are eliminated, or else term limits, which I don't particularly support. Otherwise, you Liberals are just kidding yourselves.
October 2, 2008
11:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
O_TRAIN writes:
cynical one writes "But she can field dress a moose. We definitely need a VP that can do that."
I agree - If we are ever attacked by a herd of Moose, she could come in handy, as you know.....we must fight the Moose over there, so we don't have to fight them here.
October 2, 2008
11:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Nobama writes:
O_TRAIN,
What a clever post. And so substantive and relevant. I can see you sitting in some high school class room as we speak. You are truly representative of the intellect on this forum. I'll check back another time and hope there's something worthwhile to comment on.
October 2, 2008
11:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
nobama is the perfect example of the rushian footsoldier.
sorry, nobama, but you kind of set yourself up for this:
"most Conservatives support is anti-Obama, hence my name, Nobama."
that's exactly right...you attack obama because you can't defend voting a third bush term under mcsame.
but why oh why are you going to vote for it?
because of a strawman argument.
because you "hate the whole idea of socialism"
when cornered on the fact that neither candidate is any more guilty of being a "socialist" than the other, the loyal footsoldier inevitably resorts to willful ignorance followed finally by rebooting altogether and circling back around to the attacking, the myths and the fallacious arguments.
i urge all the loyal footsoldiers out there...if you're not going to base your vote on actual policy stances (instead of ones you just make up apparently)...do the country a favor and stay home on election day.
the last thing we need are more uninformed voters at the polls.
October 2, 2008
11:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
chickenlittle1234 writes:
Nobama writes "...the issue most Conservatives support is anti-Obama, hence my name, Nobama."
That's exactly most conservatives problem - your type is only against. Not for. But I'd be more exact - it's what social conservatives are against. They're against inclusiveness. They're against the very idea of change and evolution of thought and action. This country ain't no Country Club, as much as you seem to want it that way.
October 2, 2008
11:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Look. The fact is everyone one this post already has their minds made up and nothing, I mean nothing is going to change that.
If Palin wiped the floor with Biden tonight - the Left will say she was well coached, but it wouldn't change anyone's mind. If McCain took Palin off the ticket, raised Lincoln from the dead and put him on the ticket - the Left will still be backing Obama. I don't have a problem with that. That's the American Way - choose a side and we vote!
One side is going to win, one side is going to lose; and in four years we get to do it all over again.
October 2, 2008
11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
O_TRAIN writes:
Nobama,
Ridiculous begats ridiculous. I do agree, in that I hate this process which gives us only two candidates. As an Independent I usually go with a process of elimination - and I was able to eliminate McCain based on his irresponsible selection of Palin. IMO not in the best interests of the country. Doesn't mean I'm supporting Obama, but I have yet to eliminate him as a choice.
As I've said before, the selection of Palin, is the equivalent of showing a Bic lighter to a bunch of Aborigines - fascinating and magical for awhile, but will eventually burn someone and run out of gas.
Is that substantive and non-clever enough for you?
October 2, 2008
11:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
nobama: So let me get this straight. You hate socialism and the fact that it may cost tax payers to make sure OUR citizens don't go hunger or don't get health care. But you support the Iraq people getting it. And you are for capitalism that allows big banks and CEO's to give themselves multi-million dollar salaries and when they run their bank out of business we bail them out with 700 billion dollars. You know I don't think we have ever spent that much money on social programs in the history of this country. I would be ready to bet that everyone of these CEO's and executives have the big R on their voter registration cards. It is capitalism that is killing us not socialism.
October 2, 2008
11:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
TruthHurts writes:
Not to worry....John McCain has insured us the fundamentals of the economy are strong.....
And how many times are those old fighter pilots going to land at the scene...(McCain's triumphant return to Washington last week) and announce Mission Accomplished......
October 2, 2008
11:49 a.m.
Suggest removal
TruthHurts writes:
That should have been assured...... guess it was a Biden moment
October 2, 2008
11:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
TruthHurts writes:
If Sarah Palin finds her own way to the stage for tonight's debate will the Republicans spin it as a good performance?
October 2, 2008
12:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
The reality is, who ever wins in November - half of the country is going to despise him from Day 1.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/0...
October 2, 2008
12:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Beergut writes:
"But she can field dress a moose. We definitely need a VP that can do that."
Do you need to bring up Ted Kennedy in all of this?
(BTW Gwen Ifill is not writing a pro-Obama book, she is writing a book about recent African-American leaders, no where has she said it will be positive about all the subjects in the book).
October 2, 2008
12:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
dakar writes:
Oh, I love it. "It is capitalism that is killing us not socialism."
Go take a look at the Socialist states out there, including France. Unemployment over 10%, up to 20% in some countries. Economies that are stagnant for years.
Thats the problem with so many liberals, its not that their left, its that their so far out in left field their not in the park anymore. Not even Hillary is liberal enough to win democratic nomination. If Bill Clinton were running now, he would be considered to center for the democratic party. The republican party has taken a shift to the center, but the democratic party keeps moving more and more left.
October 2, 2008
12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
p_myers661 writes:
It's a pity the winner of a political debate is seldom defined by competence and too often by image. In politics, the angle of the camera, the tone of voice, the on screen appearance or some other meaningless nothing creates an image. That is what is likely tonight. Look for Ifil to do a great job. Biden and Palin will both do well with the boilerplate. The real results will be told by the election.
I hope we get a good look at both people. I have a favorite but really want to see what will happen. I'm glad a real journalist, someone who writes real books and does research, is in charge.
The reason few are happy with the presidential choices we face is that many feel it would be better for Obama to have waited for more experience before running. That's because that experience would teach him some practical things. Many also supported Hilary and see Obama as being someone who could have given them sixteen years of control of the Presidency instead of a possible four.
Others are unhappy with McCain because he isn't a conservative. he picked Palin because he knows he can't win without the base and they are only voting for him because of her. He, even if he wins, is likely to face a primary challenger in four years against a hard conservative.
That's why neither side is really up for this election and that is sad.
The most impractical thing Obama favors reminds me of Reagan. Both wanted to reform the bureaucracy and make it efficient. Reagan failed and so would Obama if elected. Not because either of them lacked the true desire for change, but the time available for any president is not enough to sunder the Gideon knot of perverse regulations, silly chains of command and just plain obstruction from the old guard sitting at their desks knowing they will be there after the president is gone. It's like trying to cut down a century oak with a butter knife.
And, given time, Obama's intelligence and style, I expect him to change parties in about 20 years so he can do all the good he wants.
Oh well. time to set up the VCR, yeah, we still use the cheap stuff, and record the entire thing so I can listen without looking a few times and read the transcripts before I decide who I think won.
Hope someone posts a letter so we can compare notes. The sysem here is guaranteed to keep us from navigating to good old posts and sticking us with silly new ones. Maybe they can learn from DP's search and navigation tools. Or, hah!, provided a built in link so we can return where we have posted and even see when someone replies. Until then, I'll be back Sunday. Be well.
Jay, I often disagree with you. On this we probably support the other guy, but you sound like you realize that whoever is declared the winner is also declared because of pre-debate impressions which can be sandbagged. Please post about what you see tonight. Let us know your opinion. I'll be free with mine.
October 2, 2008
12:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
dakar
Can you tell us what socialist program has cost us 700 billion? Or have we in the history of this country spent that much on social programs?
You just keep covering for your capitalist pals. Maybe they will cut you in on some of that money. NOOOT!!!!!!!!!!!
October 2, 2008
12:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
zivo24 writes:
Biden has a hands-on education on most of the issues that will be before them tonight.
Palin has been being schooled on them all week.
She is smart and a skilled debater so it's not unreasonable that she will take the information she's learned and craft answers that give the impression that she has a grasp of the issues.
Biden won't need any coaching on the issues, other than making sure his responses are in lines with Obama's policies...which is a significant challenge Palin has with McCain's policies, also, because she holds much more extreme positions than he does.
Like the presidential debate, this could come down to how they present themselves.
Biden needs to stay on topic, keep his answers short and to the point, not try to be 'cute' and be respectful of Palin without treating her with kid gloves.
Palin has a greater challenge in that she needs to sound like she does have a real grasp of the issues she's talking about and doesn't sound like she is just repeating things she recently
learned.
But will she be respectful and courteous or will she be the pitbull with lipstick?
She has the ability to come across as condescending as well, so she has to be careful as well.
Biden needs to debate her like he would Hillary Clinton - because if he does wipe the floor with her and the GOP tries to spin that he was too hard on her...the media....and Saturday Night Live is going to pounce on it..because they know that Clinton could stand toe to toe with any other politician....and the media...so why can't Palin?
October 2, 2008
12:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
That's the best post I've ever seen by you Nobama (honestly, I thought that was a good post).
"Why do you insist upon pushing the anti-McCain theme, when the issue most Conservatives support is anti-Obama, hence my name, Nobama."
There are several reasons:
1) Don't dish it if you can't take it (that's weak, I'll grant)
2) Attack ads are effective, hence why politicians tend to use them more than positive ads. I think the same logic would apply to attack posts as well.
3) It's very easy to attack. I'm not sure how much you've been paying attention, but cynical and others like myself have made lots of long, detailed posts defending Obama against the attacks by people like you. Why should we be the only ones defending when your own candidate has so many vulnerabilities? It's high time your side started putting up some sort of defense. I don't think just because a 'R' is next to McCain's name on the ballot is good enough. Exhibit A) George Bush.
Now, let's make some predictions. First, let's assume you are completely, 100% right about Obama. We'll assume he's a socialist that will somehow try to further wreck an already completely wrecked economy. If he were a socialist facing the current financial crisis what he do? He would try to have the government step in and take an ownership stake in banks and other large institutions in trouble and buy shares of other major businesses in trouble. Doesn't sound too different than what's already happening. OK, then what would he do with the tax budget? A socialist would try to redistribute wealth as equally as possible. Now IF he was a true socialist he would propose a tax bill that could not possibly be passed by the senate because the Republicans would still have at least 40 votes and be able to filibuster. There are also many Democrat senators that would be opposed to such a budget. So what would happen? The government might stop running for a while as it did under Clinton. Theoretically Congress would have to put a budget that would be veto-proof, meaning a lot of bi-partisan work. So, from my point of view, arguing that he's a true socialist is a losing argument, at worse it will finally force Congress to work in a bi-partisan way and may force the government to close shop for a while :P.
Of course, I don't think he's a socialist. If you want to see a socialist you need to look on the other side of the ocean over in Europe where there are still healthy socialist parties. If Obama was running for office over there he'd have to run in their conservative party.
October 2, 2008
12:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
Now, in fairness, let's look at McCain and assume that we are 100% right in that he's Bush Jr II. In that case, no matter what happens, he makes another huge tax cut. You may argue that, like the Republicans in my previous example, the Democrat senators would just filibuster the bill. However, when is the last time Congressional Democrats showed any guts? It's hard to oppose tax cuts even if they primarily favor the rich because, frankly, there are just too many people in the public that think tax rates can't be too low, regardless of any evidence to the contrary. So the bill gets passed, now we have an even larger budget deficit and an even weaker dollar. If he's Bush Jr II he will not come close to cutting enough spending to be able to make up the difference. We will be in a recession for at least 6 months according to the most optimistic economists and more likely for 2 years or more (whether Obama or McCain are elected). So while he's trying to cut taxes, the federal government will have less revenue due to a shrinking economy. And we will STILL be spending billions every month in Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq isn't close to a political reconciliation so who knows when we'll finally get our troops out of there.
However, he is not Bush II. At least Bush had a VP that is capable of running the country and that circumstance was highly unlikely due to Bush's age and good health. McCain is much older and not in nearly as good of health as Bush. Palin is simply not qualified to handle all of the responsibilities of the president and I think she would lean on her advisers even more than Bush has--and given the quality of her advisers in Alaska (high school friends) I am not overflowing in confidence that she would have people around her any better than Bush has.
October 2, 2008
12:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
cynical_one
Exactly that was the point I was getting at. But I guess you good call it socialism for the rich. They have no problem with that.
October 2, 2008
12:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
Uno writes:
The Associated Press wasted no time to say something negative about Palin, right in the first sentence, and to the delight of these brainless liberal lemmings. These liberal's masters in the media and the DNC already set the course selecting Obama in 2004. Democrats never had a choice, it was Barack or else. If this is the kind of selective democracy liberals dreamed about, now they got it. But it does not mean that the rest of us have to follow. Vote McCain / Palin
October 2, 2008
12:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
zivo24 writes:
Sarah Palin and every McCain supporter should be thanking whatever God they believe in that it'll be Joe Biden on the other side of the stage tonight...instead of Hillary Clinton.
The GOP has been treating Palin like a glass doll and even conservatives are starting to complain about how they are going out of their way to protect her from the public...or the public from her.
That her opponent tonight is a man is the only advantage Palin really has. Biden's knowledge and experience can't be compared to Palin's. If this were any other job..he would have already been hired.
But to not be viewed negatively he is going to have to walk a fine
line..where he has to show how much more qualified he is than her without embarrassing her.
If Obama had chosen Hillary Clinton has his VP...Palin would likely be hiding in an igloo in Alaska about now...because Clinton could wipe the floor with Palin just as easily as Biden could..but she wouldn't be seen as a bully for it afterwards.
October 2, 2008
12:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
Uno
Have you heard this women talk? Don't think she makes an easy target when she makes stupid statements about how you can see Russia from Alaska? I can remember you all jumped all over Gore for I invented the Internet. And rightfully so that was a stupid thing to say. Come on deal with it. Better yet admit she was a joke for a choice.
October 2, 2008
12:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
zivo24
If Obama would have picked Hillary, Sarah Palin wouldn't have got the nod. This was nothing more than a ploy to get the women's vote.
Country first my a--.
October 2, 2008
1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
zivo24 writes: "If Obama had chosen Hillary Clinton has his VP...Palin would likely be hiding in an igloo in Alaska about now...because Clinton could wipe the floor with Palin just as easily as Biden could..but she wouldn't be seen as a bully for it afterwards."
Hillary couldn't get either the presidential or vice-presidential nomination. Hillary isn't going to be "wiping the floor" with anybody. She's done.
The only way Hillary could get into this debate is if she has a ticket.
October 2, 2008
1:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
SPUD writes:
What is Biden going to say?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7RJAn...
October 2, 2008
1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen21 writes:
Yes, Biden has more experience than Palin. Biden is representative of "Good ole' Boy" Washington. But isn't this what the Obama ticket is opposing - don't they want to stand for change? Didn't Obama promise to shake up washington?
Before you jump all over me, I was not in favor of McCain when this started. He is too central for me. I do lean toward the conservative. Hence, Obama is not a logical choice for me. But that is the great thing about America - you have a choice.
I can say, I'm so tired of all the mixed messages and the neagative and sensationalized reporting by the media. Both tickets have been misrepresented with positive and negative bias. I've yet to read one unbiased article. I understand, even if I don't agree with you, the emotional writing in the forums and blogs, etc. But I don't get it in the media. Don't want it there either.
I am excited about the debate. To hear what they say. I watched the other one too. I won't watch the commetary afterwards or read the polls - I can make up my own mind. And vote accordingly.
See you on November 4!
October 2, 2008
1:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
fastnloose writes:
If Obama had picked Hillary at least one person on the Dem ticket would be capable of running the country!
October 2, 2008
1:20 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
zivo24 writes: "She is smart and a skilled debater so it's not unreasonable that she will take the information she's learned and craft answers that give the impression that she has a grasp of the issues."
Unreal. What did I just say? If Palin crushes Biden the Left will make all kinds of excuses about "how well coached" she was.
The fact is The Governor knows what it takes to run something. Obama and Biden together couldn't run a taco stand.
Guide to tonight's debate: How to know when Obama or Biden (or 'the lawyers') are coached?..
Any time they have to give an answer having to do with leadership, accountability, or actually ever having a real job.
October 2, 2008
1:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
zivo24 writes:
Cowboy,
You're missing the point...
Sarah Palin vs Hillary Clinton in a VP debate would have been like pitting Minnie Mouse against the Terminator in a death match.
I didn't want Clinton as VP...and from what I've read she wouldn't have accepted it if Obama had offered...but boy would I have loved to have seen Palin try to take her on.
And Diligraf is right...If Obama had picked Clinton and she had accepted...Palin wouldn't be on the GOP ticket. She wasn't picked because of her qualifications to step into the presidency if need be...she was picked because of her appeal to a faction of the GOP that McCain was having winning on his own...the folks on the religious right and everyone stuck in an "Us vs Them" mentality...like Uno.
October 2, 2008
1:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
zivo24 writes:
MarineGrunt writes:
"she makes stupid statements about how you can see Russia from Alaska?"
REALLY...? Do we have to have the Geography lesson again?
I thought we did this yesterday!!!
You CAN see Russia from Alaska!! At one point, they are about 1.5 miles away from each other. Don't tell me I have to tell you where this is.. do I?
*******************************************************************
Wow....where do I begin?
First of all...the joke about Palin is that her only foreign policy experience is that she can see Russia from Alaska.
You're taking things out of context and apparently have zero sense of humor.
As for the distance between Alaska and Russia...it's about 2.5 miles between two small islands...one owned by Russia, the other owned by Alaska (U.S.).
But the distance between the mainlands is more then 55 miles.
But again..the joke..which you obviously don't get is that being able to see another country from where you live..doesn't make you an expert on foreign policy.
I can see the mountains from one side of my balcony and the plains from the other side..but that doesn't make me a pro skier or a farmer.
Get it?
October 2, 2008
1:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
ifyem writes:
I can see the mountains from one side of my balcony and the plains from the other side..but that doesn't make me a pro skier or a farmer.
Get it?
According to Sarah Palin it does!!! Good analogy!!!
October 2, 2008
1:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
BrandiWine_84 writes:
Governor Sarah Palin : "It's time that normal Joe Six-pack American is finally represented in the position of vice presidency."
I guess it's too bad I don't drink. Otherwise, Palin for VP just might make sense to me.
And yes folks, she really did say this. And no, it was not a response to a "gotcha" question.
October 2, 2008
1:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
INC writes:
MarineGrunt,
It would be nice if at the debate tonight, they drew a map of the middle east on both sides of a portable chalk board. (without labeling the countries)
Then each Candidate would have to step up (@ the same time) to either side and write the names on the corresponding countries...
How do you think Palin would do?
October 2, 2008
1:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
ifyem writes:
It's also pretty funny that the majority of folks who live on that island in the Bering Strait didn't even know that Palin had been nominated for VP..She has never once visited the island, nor did she obtain a passport until she was 47!!! I know teenagers that have more international travel under their belts than this knucklehead..Come on, McCain supporters, just admit your VP candidate is an idiot, and also stop being naive and admit that the idea of having this woman one heartbeat away from being President is a very scary proposition indeed!!!
You guys always argue Country First!!! Prove it!!!
October 2, 2008
2:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fisherman writes:
Palin may not know which of the four Bush doctrines to reply to or have at her fingertips Supreme court decisions she disagrees with, but I'd rather have someone as VP that will learn than someone who will lie.
October 2, 2008
2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
fishoutawater writes:
The McSame/Failin ticket will plumit tonight as Americans realize how serious this presidential race is. How we cannot afford to let "Maverick" types actually have controll of the whiltehouse. We need solid leadership.
Shes a token candidate and more and more of us are realizing that.
Privatized Profits = Socialized Loses???
McSame/Failin - NO WAY!
October 2, 2008
2:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
zivo24 writes:
Fisherman writes:
Palin may not know which of the four Bush doctrines to reply to or have at her fingertips Supreme court decisions she disagrees with, but I'd rather have someone as VP that will learn than someone who will lie.
**********************************************************
Perhaps you aren't aware that Palin is STILL under investigation in her state.
Or may you do and you believe that she really didn't have anything to do with her staff making calls to pressure the public safety commissioner to fire her ex-brother-in-law?
Maybe you're the kind of guy who would take it upon himself to intercede in the personal affairs of your boss, in a professional context..without her knowledge or consent.
By the way..how do you think Palin's staff even knew about the ex-brother-in-law and why were they going to such lengths to get him fired? He wasn't their ex-brother-in-law.
Ultimately, it comes down to this...either she did put them up to making those calls and is now lying about it...or she was so out of the loop..or out of control..of her own staff in Alaska that they were able to do all this without her knowing.
If she is telling the truth...that she didn't know..then ask yourself...WHY DIDN'T SHE KNOW? If she can't manage the staff of one of the least populated states in the country..she's really going to be in trouble when she's VP.
October 2, 2008
2:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Speak writes:
Liberals are:
“so far in the tank” for Obama that “their oxygen delivery line is running out.”
Biden:
he said al-Qaida has re-established a safe haven and it's not in Baghdad. "It's in the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan," he said, "where my helicopter was recently forced down."
Kerry responds:
"We sat up there and traded stories," Kerry joked. "We were going to send Biden out to fight the Taliban with snowballs, but we didn't have to do it." He added: "Other than getting a little cold, it was fine."
Liberal Comedian speaks:
during a diatribe in her one-woman show in Washington
last month in which she said Palin should be
"gang-raped by my big black brothers".
Good job Dems with friend like these, well you know the rest...
"Gutting" Liberals one vote at a time!
October 2, 2008
2:24 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
I was going to see "300" the other day until I heard is wasn't about the Spartans but rather about Obama's army of economic advisors.
None of the candidates know everything all the time - that is what they hire a staff for!
I'd much rather have Palin say "I'll get back to you" rather than Biden giving me some total bs answer that is both incorrect and irrelevant to the question. Lawyers!
Honesty matters.
October 2, 2008
2:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
ifyem writes:
Lawyers!
Honesty matters.
Cowboys!!!
Intelligence matters.
October 2, 2008
2:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
Fisherman
In your great wisdom can you list the lies that Biden has told. Now you should be an expert on lies since you have heard them enough times from Bush.
October 2, 2008
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
LOUIE writes:
Nobama, again as I read your words, I notice the wheel is still spinning, but the hamster died long ago. As for people you insult for writting from their high school classroom; not all of us are like you with a musical degree from Sing_Sing. But hey, fix me up one of those meatball sandwiches when you get a chance between posts, will ya please?
October 2, 2008
2:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen21 writes:
Oh, and for all the crap Palin is getting on her "sound-bites" - have you ever paid attention to the crap Biden spits out? It's interesting to me that his strange comments are not portrayed more in the media. Maybe is looney comments are from his 2 Brain Aneurisms.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpjAs4...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHVBMP...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hZtW_...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TBNeN...
October 2, 2008
2:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
MBR693 writes:
Dilligaf, put your money where your mouth is. Complete the sentence:
I believe Biden is a good VP choice for the country because...
October 2, 2008
2:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
chickenlittle1234 writes:
Cowboy63 writes "Honesty matters." True, it does. And when McCain can be honest in his ads, or at the very least, not make some absurd comment like 100% of his ads are 100% true, I can maybe begin to take that ticket a little more seriously.
On another note, I read an interesting column in today's Political Junkie (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/st...). I realize that many of you knee-jerk social conservatives might find anything on NPR to be just a shade away from Maoism, but Ken Rudin offers some of the best unpartisan analysis I've found so far. As he points out, typically, VP debates are irrelevant, even though many memorable moments can happen during them. There are risks for both Palin and Biden. But Palin, as the unproven and untested (even in primary campaigns or debates) has a lot more on the line, especially given McCain's age and higher probability that she could, indeed, be sitting in the Oval Office in the next four years.
October 2, 2008
2:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
Citizen21: Try finding some good videos of Palin in an interview. Can't find any? I can find any number of good interviews with Biden. Nobody has ever claimed that Biden is perfect, but he has demonstrated on many interviews on Meet the Press, Charlie Rose and others that he is a very knowledgeable and very capable man. He also did a stellar job in the primary debates, better than Obama in most of the early ones in my opinion.
October 2, 2008
2:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fisherman writes:
Zivo & Cynical:
None of your charges have been proven that Palin lied.
Proven Biden lies:
Biden ''went to law school on a full academic scholarship - the only one in my class to have a full academic scholarship,'' adding that he ''ended up in the top half'' of his class (not true) and ''graduated with three degrees from college" (not true).
Five months later, Biden acknowledged that he graduated 76th in a class of 85. ''I did not graduate in the top half of my class at law school and my recollection of this was inaccurate," he said in a statement. He graduated with one degree -- a B.A. -- in two majors, history and political science.
"Number one, you take all the troops out - you better have helicopters ready to take those 3,000 civilians inside the Green Zone, where I have been seven times and shot at. You better make sure you have protection for them, or let them die."
Along with the claim that Joe Biden had a "blue-collar" upbringing -- he had a decidedly upper class (though not "rich") childhood -- Joe Biden has for years claimed that his first wife and his daughter were killed by a "drunk driver" in 1972. However, closer examination of the records proves that the man driving the truck that slammed into the Biden family car was never charged with drunken driving.
Plagiarism.
October 2, 2008
3:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
MBR693
His foreign policy is his strong suit. He has sat with practically every world leader. And at a time when we need to rebuild our relationship around the world the last thing we need is Barbie doing on the job training. Man I worry about people like you.
October 2, 2008
3:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
Pop quiz: Which candidate said there were 57 states, including "New Pennsylvannia"?
Maybe one of Obama's advisors should have clued him into the details about the country he's trying to run.
57 States?! Not even Jimmy was that lost!
October 2, 2008
3:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Citizen21 writes:
My point was that it seemed Palin was getting slamed, but Biden was getting off the hook. In truth, there have been some messed up things said - by all.
cynical_one writes: "Have you ever paid attention to the crap you spit out?"
I don't spit out crap. I poised a point - not a personal attack. I don't expect everyone to agree with me, and I appreciate intelligent responses (thanks joggle). But that was unnecessary.
October 2, 2008
3:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
chickenlittle1234 writes:
Cowboy63 - I trust you've actually seen the clip you reference. It always struck me that Obama merely misspoke, because as he continues, he makes a reference that he had one state to go and that he couldn't make it to Hawaii or Alaska. Now, say you had in your mind 50 states, but at the same time you were trying to remember how many you had already been to, and that you had one to go, and that there were two you weren't going to hit, that would make...47!
Still, it was good humor to watch, I agree. On the other hand, if that slip is enough for you to not vote for Obama, I'm sure you didn't (and wouldn't) vote for W, if only due to his creativeness with the English language.
October 2, 2008
3:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
LOUIE writes:
Years ago, several politicians from both parties were asked what should be done to stop the turmoil in "Freedonia", a make believe country in the Marx Brothers "Duck Soup". They took it seriously and the responses were hilarious. On a more serious note, with Mc Cain's advanced years, Palin will be under more scrutiny than Biden. A convention speech is a lot different than a debate or open dialog as Palin found out with Katie Couric. I like a lot of things Palin stands for, but Biden is by far more seasoned in international affairs. I hope it's a great debate for both candidates. If Palin shows up confident, attacks on the issues, she could conceivable pull it off as Biden is a boring speaker. Biden has a long history to attack, while Palin's relative lack of history is open to attack by Biden. I think Biden will come out on top, but that's just speculation and a gambler's view. I am going to watch it, it'll be fun for sure. Mc Cain's age has put a spotlight on the VP that really hasn't been seen before. Although age was a question with Reagan, Bush was seasoned enough not to cause concern. I think the public still has a lot of concerns that Palin needs to confidently address tonight.
October 2, 2008
3:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
JMac writes: "This was a joke regarding the 57 primaries..... Anybody with half a brain knows that and anybody with an ounce of wit thought it was funny."
If you say so. Maybe they should have asked Obama if he knew the difference between primaries and states?
Pop quiz (part 2): Which candidate just said, "After the market crash of '29 - FDR went on TV and addressed the nation".
Maybe instead of springing for the plugs - Biden should have went for a little remedial on US History.
FDR wasn't president and TV wasn't around!
As JMac says - "Anybody with half a brain knows that."
You want to keep telling me how dumb you think Palin is?
October 2, 2008
3:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
chaka419 writes:
This is why I hate election time. We are suppose to be fellow Americans. Over the past 5-10 years the liberals have gotten so hateful in their arguments. They no longer have the words "respectfully disagree" in their vocabulary. The only reason they hate Palin is because she could possibly be the first woman in or near the White House. It is the fact that their candidate did NOT pick a woman. They themselves did NOT pick a woman. They can not fathom that a Conservative woman would make that milestone first. They don't care that a woman any woman as VP would be huge, for liberals, it must be a liberal woman first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am a free thinking conservative woman that may not have voted for Hillary if she had won the nomination, but would be okay with her being the first woman president if my candidate could not.
To bad liberals are neither free thinking or able to respectfully disagree!!
October 2, 2008
3:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Fisherman writes:
57 States:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/...
Cynical:
I'm waiting for your PROOF that Palin lied...got any? I didn't think so.
October 2, 2008
3:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
diggtbks writes:
FCZ writes:
"The moderator is making money writing a book favorable to Barack Obama."
It will be a hostile environment for Palin.
Biden may pull it off if he can eloquently tell his story about President Roosevelt on tv during the Great Depression.
October 2, 2008
3:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
diggtbks writes:
Cowboy63 writes:
"Pop quiz: Which candidate said there were 57 states, including "New Pennsylvannia"?"
"New Pennsylvannia" is the state where "people cling to their guns and religion". Oh those people.....
October 2, 2008
3:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
chickenlittle1234 writes:
chaka419 writes "Over the past 5-10 years the liberals have gotten so hateful in their arguments."
Puh-leeze. After witnessing the shenanigans of the Karl Rove days, the stealing of an election, the lies, etc. etc., and you start off by saying it's the liberals who have gotten hateful? Sorry, ma'am, but I am not buying that one.
October 2, 2008
3:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
O_TRAIN writes:
chaka419,
I respectfully disagree, I couldn't care less what "parts" are in a candidate's pants. I don't think a candidate should be chosen because it might be "ground-breaking milestone", I prefer the person most qualified and able. There is too much at stake.
October 2, 2008
3:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Speak writes:
By his own admission Biden should not be VP nominee …
Mr. Biden mused that the Democrats’ nominee for President, Senator Barack Obama, “might have been better off with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton as his running mate”.
“Hillary Clinton is as qualified or more qualified than I am to be Vice president of the United States of America,” Mr. Biden said, “Quite frankly, it might have been a better pick than me.”
I concur so Man-up, Step down....Go Away!
October 2, 2008
3:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
chickenlittle1234 writes:
Fisherman - I'll watch all of your Snopes clips if you watch all of my DailyKos clips. Seriously, I'm happy to follow something a little more credible.
diggtbks - Somewhere higher up this thread, Cowboy63 makes a good point regarding the pre-spin on the left, that if Palin does well, it's only because she was coached. Despite not liking Palin, I agree with his point, and she may prove to be a more skilled debater than many might have guessed. But Cowboy's observation cuts both ways - and what I see are many conservatives who are worried that she won't do well, and who are also guilty of pre-spin. Face it, if she can't handle tough questions here, how the heck could she be expected to handle the pressure of leading a nation in the hopefully unlikely event she has to.
October 2, 2008
3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
joggle writes:
chaka419: I consider myself to generally be a liberal and post here often. Try doing this google search: "joggle site:rockymountainnews.com" and try to find a single post by me that you consider to be hateful. I'll admit that I'm occasionally disrespectful but that's only when I'm responding to someone who is showing me and 'liberals' no respect at all, just pure antipathy.
Now you claim that liberals are 'only' against Palin because we don't what a Republican to be the first woman VP. Please, other than our dislike for her (the reasons of which we have described all over the Internet), what leads you to this conclusion that we are really just all lying and are really against for the reason you propose? How many Republicans do you personally know that would answer affirmatively to this question, "Do you believe that liberals are against Palin only because they do not want a Republican to be the first female VP?" I challenge you to ask that question to every Republican you know in person (not on-line) and every Libertarian you know and find how many people would agree with that statement.
Oct