or Connect
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Is it going to be Sarah Palin?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is it going to be Sarah Palin? - Page 9

post #241 of 567
McCain has not yet been ahead in this race, and his campaign reeks of desperation. There is absolutely no evidence that he will "win easily". It's almost a stretch to say it will be close.

Especially because the polls are severely biased in favor of McCain, and he is still not ahead. Cell phone - only households are never included in polls, there are millions of us, and we're 10x likelier to be Democrats... meaning republicans are severely over-represented in the polling pool. This wasn't true until very recently, but it's fair to say a few percentage points should be added the other way to any poll you do see. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/515/poll...l-only-problem

That is, this election, if it continues the way it has been, will be a landslide. And not for McCain.
post #242 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportBikeMike View Post
I don't think its going to be close at all. I see McCain winning in a landslide of Dukakis-like proportions. If Obama would have picked Hillary for a running mate then it would have been close....with Obama maybe even winning. But as it stands now, with the energized Republican base and the many disgruntled Hillary supporters/ Dems switching over...McCain will win easy.
Don't you mean George H.W. Bush proportions? Dukakis lost, but I do see a comparison between the negative campaign ads then (remember Willie Horten?), and the ones running now. Such ads hurt Hillary in the primaries, and I wonder if McCain is well-advised to follow suit? I could have voted for him in 2000, if he'd been nominated, but right now his campaign ads and his flip-flopping are a real turn-off.

Sorry, but I can't see many disgruntled Hillary supporters switching their allegiance to McCain simply because he picked Palin based on her gender and age. There are those "little matters" like abortion, gun control, protected species, oil drilling and "pork" that just might play a bigger role than gender among "split-ticketers" like myself.

However:

Is anybody else here considerig "damage control"? I seriously believe that whoever is elected will be faced with an impossible task, thanks to the mess G.W. Bush is leaving behind. McCain is old, and won't be involved in politics much longer, and Palin strikes me as a "flash in the pan" á la Dan Quayle. That team, if elected, would probably be faced with Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, and thus have to fight an uphill battle, and "betray" GOP principles for anything to get done. What impact would that have on the Republican Party?

People who like Obama might be better off in the long run if they "save him for later", and make McCain/Palin the sacrificial lambs.
post #243 of 567
Quote:
McCain is old, and won't be involved in politics much longer,
I agree. I mean look how much the Presidency ages Presidents. It's worse than a tanning bed, and if that's what it does to your outsides. I don't wanna know what it does to the insides! lol
post #244 of 567
One note - thecanopener, you currently have this as your signature:

Quote:
"Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a 'community organizer,' except that you have actual responsibilities." - Sarah Palin
I know that's from her speech but, really, it's a part that I really didn't like because she (or her speech writer to be honest) is belittling community organizers.

Community organizers do good work and help people. Someone running a TNR program helping trying to run a low cost spay/neuter clinic is a community organizer. So are churches that help give food to homeless people or.. the list goes on.

These people work hard, and they have taken on responsibilities in their community and they don't deserve being mocked.

I would actually think these sort of initiatives would be liked by the Republican party because it's people grouping together and organizing to try to improve things in their community without direct government involvement.
post #245 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom View Post
McCain has not yet been ahead in this race, and his campaign reeks of desperation. There is absolutely no evidence that he will "win easily". It's almost a stretch to say it will be close.

Especially because the polls are severely biased in favor of McCain, and he is still not ahead. Cell phone - only households are never included in polls, there are millions of us, and we're 10x likelier to be Democrats... meaning republicans are severely over-represented in the polling pool. This wasn't true until very recently, but it's fair to say a few percentage points should be added the other way to any poll you do see. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/515/poll...l-only-problem

That is, this election, if it continues the way it has been, will be a landslide. And not for McCain.
With all due respect.....you've got to be kidding!! The McCain campaign reeks of desperation????? Have you seen how the media has been dragging Ms. Palin thru the coals? Nitpicking every little thing. Now who's desperate??

As far as the polls, what makes you think more Democrats live in cell-phone only homes? I live in a cellphone only home and I'm not a Democrat...same with several of my friends. If anything polls favor Democrats...because polls are taken during the day....when Republicans are working (& and not sitting at home freeloading off the Government). BTW I read where Dukakis had a 54-38 lead on George HW Bush at this time in 1988.

Besides all the polls I've seen lately have McCain leading....and the convention is not even over yet.

BTW if you're so sure about Obama.....how about a wager. $50????
post #246 of 567
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Siggav View Post
I know that's from her speech but, really, it's a part that I really didn't like because she (or her speech writer to be honest) is belittling community organizers.
When the left belittles the work of mayors and governors that's ok?

Not all community organizers do "good" work btw. http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/25...n-obama-knows/
post #247 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportBikeMike View Post
If anything polls favor Democrats...because polls are taken during the day....when Republicans are working (& and not sitting at home freeloading off the Government).
Are you trying to say Democrats do not work? I find your responses to be very biased and unfounded. Have you actually visited every democratic house to know whether or not this "fact" is true?
post #248 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportBikeMike View Post
With all due respect.....you've got to be kidding!! The McCain campaign reeks of desperation????? Have you seen how the media has been dragging Ms. Palin thru the coals? Nitpicking every little thing. Now who's desperate??

As far as the polls, what makes you think more Democrats live in cell-phone only homes? I live in a cellphone only home and I'm not a Democrat...same with several of my friends. If anything polls favor Democrats...because polls are taken during the day....when Republicans are working (& and not sitting at home freeloading off the Government). BTW I read where Dukakis had a 54-38 lead on George HW Bush at this time in 1988.

Besides all the polls I've seen lately have McCain leading....and the convention is not even over yet.

BTW if you're so sure about Obama.....how about a wager. $50????
A) Please read the link explaining exactly what I mean by democrats being more likely to be cell-phone only.

B) Saying that "all democrats" are freeloaders and "all republicans" work hard is ridiculous, completely false, and offensive.

C) Your assumption in the first paragraph is that somehow the media is part of the democratic campaign. False. Obama said to leave her family out of it himself.

D) Find a poll, and look at it. You've now seen one that doesn't have McCain leading. Cnn, gallup, even FOX has McCain behind by 5 points. Not sure what polls you've been looking at, but you should probably find new ones.

E) No, I don't care to wager 50$, mostly because there is already an entire country and possibly the world at stake in this election.
post #249 of 567
in that case, vote for the old guy.
at least he knows how many states there are.
post #250 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post

hmm,since this is from a UK paper, and have never seen this before, i will have to say, i am not buying it. seems like is someone said,he heard somone who was told by someone at the party.
Please do a google search on "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?" and see what comes out. The media squashed the story when it first came out so it never got a lot of press. Just because you never heard it doesn't mean it wasn't said by McCain.

Here's a general question that is not being explained by the republicans. What exactly does "executive experience" mean?
post #251 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momofmany View Post
Please do a google search on "Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly?" and see what comes out. The media squashed the story when it first came out so it never got a lot of press. Just because you never heard it doesn't mean it wasn't said by McCain.

Here's a general question that is not being explained by the republicans. What exactly does "executive experience" mean?
naw, dont care really, it's not like he made it up.

Executive experience?
something obama has none of, and palin does.
post #252 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
Executive experience?
something obama has none of, and palin does.
That didn't answer my question Bruce! I really want to hear how people are interpretting it. I have my definition, but want to hear how others define it.
post #253 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom View Post
A) Please read the link explaining exactly what I mean by democrats being more likely to be cell-phone only.

B) Saying that "all democrats" are freeloaders and "all republicans" work hard is ridiculous, completely false, and offensive.

C) Your assumption in the first paragraph is that somehow the media is part of the democratic campaign. False. Obama said to leave her family out of it himself.

D) Find a poll, and look at it. You've now seen one that doesn't have McCain leading. Cnn, gallup, even FOX has McCain behind by 5 points. Not sure what polls you've been looking at, but you should probably find new ones.

E) No, I don't care to wager 50$, mostly because there is already an entire country and possibly the world at stake in this election.
A) It just said cell-phone only households are "somewhat" more liberal. Don't think thats gonna make a huge difference.

B) Where did I say ALL Democrats are "freeloaders"? I'm pretty certain most welfare recipients lean Democratic though since Democrats invented it. Do you deny that?

C) I respectfully disagree with that opinion. The media has tried to turn Obama into some kind of messiah. If it wasn't for Fox and the blogs, I would have hardly known anything about Reverend Wright or Willam Ayers. Obama seems exempt from any criticism form the mainstream media yet they have been all over Ms. Palin about every piddly little thing.

D) Like I've said, I don't put much emphasis on polls. They had Kerry way ahead this time in '04 and I showed you the 1988 example. It seems like the Democrat is always leading heading up to the election...which makes me question whether they are unbiased. The only poll that matters is the one taken on November 4.

E) What does a small bet have to do with US or world affairs. If you're so sure Obama is going to win, why not take my money? It would be couple weeks of food for Zissou. Geez....I was just trying to have a little fun with this....
post #254 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportBikeMike View Post
A) B) Where did I say ALL Democrats are "freeloaders"? I'm pretty certain most welfare recipients lean Democratic though since Democrats invented it. Do you deny that?

Well, Ms. Palin managed to get some big hunks of dough for her town, thanks to taxpayers' dollars (Big thanks to the wonderful people of the US, esp. CA & NY ), so eating at the government trough is okay with her.... maybe the welfare recipients should vote her way.....in fact, one senator, in 2001 said she was a big feeder at the pork trough!!! his name is Senator McCain
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0..._n_123573.html
She's a gal that get a dollar alright:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200809030006
post #255 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportBikeMike View Post
The media has tried to turn Obama into some kind of messiah.
And there is the state of American politics.

And no, people on welfare don't lean more democratic because Democrats "invented" welfare. Neither of those premises are true, but I'm assuming your image of the people on welfare has a lot to do with the urban poor, and urban poor tend to be liberal. Beyond that and it's misattribution of cause and effect. It is also pretty apparent that you aren't quite sure what sort of people are on welfare, and for how long. http://www.urban.org/publications/310312.html The majority are underemployed, not unemployed.

What about corporate welfare? That costs taxpayers a heck of a lot more.
post #256 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zissou'sMom View Post
And there is the state of American politics.

And no, people on welfare don't lean more democratic because Democrats "invented" welfare. Neither of those premises are true, but I'm assuming your image of the people on welfare has a lot to do with the urban poor, and urban poor tend to be liberal. Beyond that and it's misattribution of cause and effect. It is also pretty apparent that you aren't quite sure what sort of people are on welfare, and for how long. http://www.urban.org/publications/310312.html The majority are underemployed, not unemployed.

What about corporate welfare? That costs taxpayers a heck of a lot more.
Sorry, I don't see where it says the majority of welfare recipients are employed. It said 61% of FORMER welfare recipients are employed but currently just 21% of welfare recipients are employed. Or maybe I just missed something?
post #257 of 567
[quote=SportBikeMike;2403395]
As far as the polls, what makes you think more Democrats live in cell-phone only homes? I live in a cellphone only home and I'm not a Democrat...same with several of my friends. If anything polls favor Democrats...because polls are taken during the day....when Republicans are working (& and not sitting at home freeloading off the Government). BTW I read where Dukakis had a 54-38 lead on George HW Bush at this time in 1988.
[quote]

This assumption that Democrats don't work as much as Republicans is totally absurd. Democrats earn their livings just like Republicans do and are no more likely to need social welfare programs. This is just pure sterotyping and prejudice on your part.

I used to be a political polltaker. I worked for the L.A. Times Poll. We actually made most of our calls in the evening when people were most likely to be at home. Because we're in L.A. the time differences meant we starting calling the east coast around 1pm our time and moved across the nation as the evening wore on. We worked until 10 pm. People in the western farm states used to cuss us out for calling after 9 pm.

At that time there was a lot of discussion about how telephone polltaking was changing because of cell phones (we did not take polls on cell phones because of the charges), fax lines, computer lines, telemarketing laws, etc.
post #258 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momofmany View Post
That didn't answer my question Bruce! I really want to hear how people are interpretting it. I have my definition, but want to hear how others define it.
lol ok palin has ran a small town, then a state.

how obama main experience comes from community organizing,
and writting a couple of books. He just does not impress me.

i may come off, i know as hating obama, but i dont really.
i think the guy could be something, some day. But right now, at this point in time, he is a bad choice. He needs more expericne, along with learning some judgement when it comes to people skills..

both obama & mccain, are wrong when its comes to engery problems, medical care, and several other things
which is what is making me soooo upset. BOth are doing the party line thing, NOT what would be best for this country in the long run.

By the way, i really thought mccain would cross party lines, and ask hillary lol
post #259 of 567
[quote=SportBikeMike;2403450]A) It just said cell-phone only households are "somewhat" more liberal. Don't think thats gonna make a huge difference.

B) Where did I say ALL Democrats are "freeloaders"? I'm pretty certain most welfare recipients lean Democratic though since Democrats invented it. Do you deny that?

C) I respectfully disagree with that opinion. The media has tried to turn Osama into some kind of messiah. If it wasn't for Fox and the blogs, I would have hardly known anything about Reverend Wright or Willam Ayers. Obama seems exempt from any criticism form the mainstream media yet they have been all over Ms. Palin about every piddly little thing.


Your logic about welfare is absolutely absurd. Those welfare arguments are old news and untrue. Bill Clinton reformed welfare a decade ago with the Republicans. Your kind of thinking is what makes people see the right as close minded and mean spirited about people less fortunate. You paint things with an extremely broad brush. You act like a Republican in need does not take assistance and that is false. Plenty of poor people vote R because of social issues. There are people whose lives are not ruled by their politics. So much for Bush 1s thousand points of light.

Every piddly thing-Her abuse of power, her affiliation with the Alaskan Independence Party, her crazy Pastor, her pork barrel spending, her being for the bridge to nowhere before she wasn't, her love of federal earmarks, her association with Stevens, her meager resume, her lack of concern about the environment, her vapid speech not touching on the issues. Why? Because she doesn't know about them. Bush's speech writers and a teleprompter can only can so far.
Stop trying to paint her as a victim. She called herself a pitbull with lipstick. She can handle it. If not then she needs to get out of the race. People criticize public figures and if she is elected it will only get worse.
post #260 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by theimp98 View Post
lol ok palin has ran a small town, then a state.

how obama main experience comes from community organizing,
and writting a couple of books. He just does not impress me.

i may come off, i know as hating obama, but i dont really.
i think the guy could be something, some day. But right now, at this point in time, he is a bad choice. He needs more expericne, along with learning some judgement when it comes to people skills..

both obama & mccain, are wrong when its comes to engery problems, medical care, and several other things
which is what is making me soooo upset. BOth are doing the party line thing, NOT what would be best for this country in the long run.

By the way, i really thought mccain would cross party lines, and ask hillary lol
I know you don't. I never really thought you did. I don't totally hate McCain although he is not conservative enough for me in some areas and it comes down to some of the things I care about. Universal Healthcare, the environment, Iraq and some other things.
There are things about Obama I am not in agreement with either.
In all honesty I think the McCain of 8 years ago would have been more appealing to more people of all backgrounds. His polarizing VP does him no favors. She supported Pat Buchanan for crying out loud. So while the Pro-life base is all jazzed he pretty much lost any hope for swing voters, a majority of Independents, Hillary supporters and lots of Undecideds.
post #261 of 567
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
She supported Pat Buchanan for crying out loud.
Sarah Palin was co-chair of the Steve Forbes campaign.
post #262 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportBikeMike View Post
I don't think its going to be close at all. I see McCain winning in a landslide of Dukakis-like proportions. If Obama would have picked Hillary for a running mate then it would have been close....with Obama maybe even winning. But as it stands now, with the energized Republican base and the many disgruntled Hillary supporters/ Dems switching over...McCain will win easy.
I am not sure I agree with this. That McCain/Palin ticket has energized the conservative base I will agree with but that is not going to get the Republicans a landslide. I looked around the Republican convention and I swear I did not see one minority in the place. I sure there were some there but it looked like the sterotypical upper-middle class to rich white people. If the Republican are going to win they are going to have to do a better job reaching out to minorities.
post #263 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by peachytoday View Post
I am not sure I agree with this. That McCain/Palin ticket has energized the conservative base I will agree with but that is not going to get the Republicans a landslide. I looked around the Republican convention and I swear I did not see one minority in the place. I sure there were some there but it looked like the sterotypical upper-middle class to rich white people. If the Republican are going to win they are going to have to do a better job reaching out to minorities.
I think it's going to be very close. But a lot can happen between now and then, as any historian can tell you.

As far as the minorities being in the audience is concerned, keep in mind that the Democrats have a rule that each state's delegation has to match the state's population. The Republicans allow anyone to be a delegate.
post #264 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrblanche View Post
I think it's going to be very close. But a lot can happen between now and then, as any historian can tell you.

As far as the minorities being in the audience is concerned, keep in mind that the Democrats have a rule that each state's delegation has to match the state's population. The Republicans allow anyone to be a delegate.
But I guess no minorities want to be one.

Yes I agree a lot can change in 2 months. Whoever gets the nod I hope they are ready to clean up the mess. If it is McCain I hope he stays REALLY healthy.
post #265 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecanopener View Post
Sarah Palin was co-chair of the Steve Forbes campaign.
Since you don't where I get my info I think it is hard for you to guess where I get my info from.

I guess Pat Buchanan is misinformed:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...on_Israel.html

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/8/29/231114/892

I think he is pretty clear about it.
post #266 of 567
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
Since you don't where I get my info I think it is hard for you to guess where I get my info from.

I guess Pat Buchanan is misinformed:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...on_Israel.html

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/8/29/231114/892

I think he is pretty clear about it.



And Pat Buchanan can't be incorrect?
http://volokh.com/posts/chain_1220147864.shtml
post #267 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecanopener View Post
Sarah Palin was co-chair of the Steve Forbes campaign.
Since you don't know what I read or watch it is impossible for you to know where I get my information from.

I guess Pat Buchanan is "misinformed":
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...on_Israel.html

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/8/29/231114/892

I think he is pretty clear about her and her husband, who is slowly emerging to be quite the extremist.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/us...l?ref=politics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI

Take a look at these videos. It is a left leaning blog but the videos speaks for itself:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9...477/878/581881
post #268 of 567
Thread Starter 
Sarah Palin's husband was a member of AIP. So what? Those Vermonters must also be some crazy radicals because I heard a lot about them wanting to secede from the union too.

Maybe being a secessionist is ok as long as you're not an Alaskan secessionist. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/good-m...s_b_84820.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
Since you don't know what I read or watch it is impossible for you to know where I get my information from.

I guess Pat Buchanan is "misinformed":
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...on_Israel.html

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/8/29/231114/892

I think he is pretty clear about her and her husband, who is slowly emerging to be quite the extremist.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/us...l?ref=politics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwvPNXYrIyI

Take a look at these videos. It is a left leaning blog but the videos speaks for itself:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/9...477/878/581881
post #269 of 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecanopener View Post
Sarah Palin's husband was a member of AIP. So what? Those Vermonters must also be some crazy radicals because I heard a lot about them wanting to secede from the union too.

Maybe being a secessionist is ok as long as you're not an Alaskan secessionist. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/good-m...s_b_84820.html
Maybe being married to anti American radical means little to you. Following a movement founded about a rabid hater of America is ok with you then fine. I get it.

You can address the Buchanan issue but you are wrong. So I felt I needed to repeat it with sources and links so you would get it. I think I will trust Pat Buchanan's word for it over yours.

I lived in Vermont and there are some nutty people there and I don't agree with them either. I get your link. Some guy named Christopher Ketcham wants Vermont to secede from the America. What has that got to do with Sarah Palin and her husband? I will answer that. Nothing.
post #270 of 567
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CC12 View Post
Maybe being married to anti American radical means little to you. Following a movement founded about a rabid hater of America is ok with you then fine. I get it.

You can address the Buchanan issue but you are wrong. So I felt I needed to repeat it with sources and links so you would get it. I think I will trust Pat Buchanan's word for it over yours.

I lived in Vermont and there are some nutty people there and I don't agree with them either. I get your link. Some guy named Christopher Ketcham wants Vermont to secede from the America. What has that got to do with Sarah Palin and her husband? I will answer that. Nothing.

Regarding the Buchanan issue that I am not wrong on, here is the information from the link I provided above, perhaps you missed it:

"July 26, 1999, letter to the editor of the Anchorage Daily News by Sarah Palin:

Quote:
As mayor of Wasilla, I am proud to welcome all presidential candidates to our city. This is true regardless of their party, or the latest odds of their winning. When presidential candidates visit our community, I am always happy to meet them. I'll even put on their button when handed one as a polite gesture of respect.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › Is it going to be Sarah Palin?