<p>My god, how can anybody be so willfully ignorant? </p>
<p>The “liberal media” did everything they could to sink Obama with Rev. Wright, the most played story of the Democratic primaries. The “liberal media” has repeatedly given a pass to John McCain on some extremely serious gaffes, from the Al-Qaeda/Iran mixup to Gramm’s contemptuous dismissal of economic hardships. It’s quite a miracle that McCain is still in this race.</p>
<p>Axelrod is not god and he doesn’t make up the rules of the Democratic primary process. The rules have always been the same and to imply that Obama somehow cheated the system reeks of sour grapes, jealousy, and resentment. Obama beat Clinton in every credible metric, and he’s leading McCain in the national polls and EV projections. He is currently the people’s choice. </p>
<p>And no, pugfug90, black people do not make up 48% of the American population, so Obama is getting most of his approval from “regular Americans”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do some research, for once.</p>
<p>Obama cast more than 4000 votes as a state senator, and for about a mere 3% of them, he voted present.</p>
<p>There’s a difference between being a bad president and a catastrophic president. Carter was not a good president. Bush is a catastrophic president. Bush is to Carter what Andrew Johnson is to Gerald Ford.</p>
<p>That 3% were on issues that matter to me, like abortion. Besides the vast majority of bills are just mundane civic matters, it is on the issues that matter.</p>
<p>Obama’s present votes regarding those issues were based on principled objections to the bill’s details, or strategic maneuvers to evade blatant Republican attempts to stain the voting records of Democrats (for example, Republicans purposefully concoct a meaningless and far-fetched bill that will force pro-choice Democrats to vote on it, so later on, the Republicans can falsely claim that Democrats support things like “child murder”). Hillary Clinton tried to call Obama out on it, but all the pro-choice organizations in Illinois backed Obama and his present votes.</p>
<p>If you disagree with Obama’s pro-choice stance, then that’s all right. But he’s not a moral waffler on the issue.</p>
<p>And you’re a hypocrite for being so critical of Obama’s voting record, when John McCain has voted with Bush almost 100% of the time, and has missed many many many votes recently. And what about the GI Bill? McCain opposed it because, in reality, he didn’t want to create incentives for veterans to get out of combat, and then he didn’t even show up to vote because he was afraid of being exposed of being anti-veteran. Then he audaciously tries to take credit for passing the bill.</p>
<p>I am not a hypocrite, you assume that i find it a bad thing that McCain votes with bush i do not and so I am not a hypocrite. And recently both of them have missed votes, bc they have been campaigning. The bill (I saw when they debated it) included the same incentives for a person who had been in the army for say 3 or so years and a person who had served for 20. McCain said that it should be graduated so that there were more incentives based on number of years. That is not anti-veteran, I mean he actually is a veteran, he just believes ppl should have a bigger reward based on the length of service.</p>
<p>I don’t think there will be a McCain-Palin ticket for long. I believe we’re just seeing the beginning of the evidence of lack of vetting of Palin.</p>
<p>"ST. PAUL (Reuters) - The 17-year-old daughter of Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is pregnant, Palin said on Monday in an announcement intended to knock down rumors by liberal bloggers that Palin faked her own pregnancy to cover up for her child.</p>
<p>Bristol Palin, one of Alaska Gov. Palin’s five children with her husband, Todd, is about five months pregnant and is going to keep the child and marry the father, the Palins said in a statement released by the campaign of Republican presidential candidate John McCain.</p>
<p>Bristol Palin made the decision on her own to keep the baby, McCain aides said.</p>
<p>“We have been blessed with five wonderful children who we love with all our heart and mean everything to us,” the Palins’ statement said.</p>
<p>“Our beautiful daughter Bristol came to us with news that as parents we knew would make her grow up faster than we had ever planned. As Bristol faces the responsibilities of adulthood, she knows she has our unconditional love and support,” the Palins said…</p>
<p>Senior McCain campaign officials said McCain knew of the daughter’s pregnancy when he selected Palin last week as his vice presidential running mate, deciding that it did not disqualify the 44-year-old governor in any way…"</p>
<p>^While that may be true, (many, but not all) conservative Americans are going to hold this against her. I mean, with so many social conservatives who are likely to vote for McCain holding beliefs such as “no sex before marriage”, etc, they’re going to question Palin’s ability as a mother and in turn, question her ability to be VP. </p>
<p>In our modern political era, a candidate’s image is (sadly) just as important as his/her stance on issues and experience. And this will surely be a blow to Palin’s image. </p>
<p>I am no sex before marriage, but what others do does not matter. And when I heard it, afterwards they said that her child and the father were getting married, so it doesn’t matter. Alot of ppl do not realise that Biblically who are married when you have sex. So if you have sex with one person and marry them it is not as bad, though I would still advise against it.</p>
<p>^That’s not the point, Dbate. You personally may feel that what others do does not matter, and frankly so do I, but this doesn’t change the fact that in this country, a candidate’s image is sadly just as important as the policies and experience he/she will bring to the White House. </p>
<p>There are conservatives out there who will be a bit put off by this and will for whatever reason equate a bad personal situation to a bad vice presidency, even if it is an unfair and unjust train of thought.</p>
<p>Yes, both of them have missed votes. Both of them have missed meetings on Afghanistan (more so for John McCain). But you use a double standard in pardoning McCain’s flaws in his voting (or lack thereof) while you try and twist Obama’s state senatorial votes (which have been proven by organizations like FactCheck.org to have been more than just cop-out votes) to suit your pre-determined view that McCain is better. </p>
<p>And if McCain was so against the bill in the first place, why did he try and falsely take credit for it after it passed? Because he needs to kow-tow the Bush Republican line whilst appealing to veterans (a group he has ignored in the past, made evident by his “D” rating by veterans organizations and the greater funding Obama receives from service men and women).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A glaring example of flawed McCainian logic.</p>
<p>1) McCain was a soldier. Therefore, he is good with war.</p>
<p>2) McCain is old. Therefore, he is wise.</p>
<p>3) McCain is a veteran. There he is good with veteran issues and is popular with soldiers in Iraq.</p>
<p>4) McCain was a POW. Therefore, he has a license to lie, cheat on his wife, make embarrassing statements without repercussion, etc.</p>
<p>You’re right math, Bush is a dumb guy. That doesn’t make anyone that is so vitrolently against the Republican party any less dumb.</p>
<p>Cervantes, it’s amazing that you compare the more experienced nominee from the Dem ticket to the less experienced one on McCain’s. LOL</p>
<p>““Furthermore, some may argue being Senator is more important because Senators know Washington and how to get bills passed which the President needs to do. Also, remember she’s governor of Alaska-they have a different set of issues than most other states.””</p>
<p>Umm.. you’re just pulling straws is all I can say.</p>
<p>The point is not whether Obama ran an effective campaign, it’s whether or not he’s a proven leader. Anyway, with gas prices so high, consumers without credit, the Iraq war seen as a mistake, this should’ve been a shooin for Obama but we see him struggling, so it’s a miracle that McCain is as competitive as it is. Heck, they just raised $47 million in August! As to his campaign, if Axelrod didn’t micromanage, and Hillary wasn’t so complacent, it was likely she would win. Yes he won fair and square, that doesn’t show exemplary leadership by Obama.</p>
<p>Yes, the GI bill is another example of McCain taking the clearly blatantly unpopular position because he would rather serve the country than pander. :D</p>
<p>This new pregnancy that just emerged. I don’t know any family that’s peachy. People look perfect on the outside but really so many people have skeletons in the closets. I won’t list any of mine, except I say to you, good for you if you or your family don’t have ANYTHING to be embarrassed of and willing to expose your WHOLE life to the world.</p>
<p>The only reason this race is close is b/c Obama is black and the right wing has been trying to scare people into thinking he is Muslim. If he were white he would be miles ahead. Lets all admit he truth.</p>
<p>“The only reason this race is close is b/c Obama is black and the right wing has been trying to scare people into thinking he is Muslim. If he were white he would be miles ahead. Lets all admit he truth.” - paraphrasing G. Ferraro - if he we’re white he wouldn’t have been nominated.</p>
<p>^^Not really. I read a statistics analysis of Obama versus the other GOP candidates and he was beating them, and McCain faired well against Clinton as well. There is some aspect of McCain that is more appealing to voters than the generic Republican brand. But moreover I think Obama’s lack of experience is something that causes a lot of ppl to be hesitant. </p>
<p>Some ppl may have problems voting for a black candidate, but that is not the reason John McCain is doing so well. It is because he would make a good president, regardless of what some ppl would think, and many others agree.</p>
<p>DocT is right. A white man with one term in the Senate? Please, Obama is there bc he is black and can speak well, there really is no other reason that he is the candidate. I guess for liberal ppl he represents them well, but Biden does that and would be a better president than Obama.
When Biden and Obama are next to each other it just highlights the fact that Obama is inexperienced, Obama should be Biden’s vice-president not the other way around.</p>
<p>As much as I’m not particularly pro-Democrat, they have zillions more qualified candidates than Obama. Anybody can promise anything that appeals to a voting group. The issue is who can deliver not who is more eloquent or whatever other criteria anybody wants to use.</p>
<p>I’m sorry, but someone like Colin Powell I don’t think so many Americans would be so divided about. Obama, this dumb, egotistic, phony unprincipled, hopey dope has no reasons for America to be all over him.</p>
<p>Once upon a time Dan Quayle was considered inexperienced - I guess times have changed - </p>
<p>“In 1976, Quayle was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives from Indiana’s Fourth Congressional District, defeating eight-term incumbent Democrat J. Edward Roush. He won reelection in 1978 by the greatest percentage margin ever achieved to that date in the northeast Indiana district. In 1980, at age 33, Quayle became the youngest person ever elected to the U.S. Senate from the state of Indiana, defeating three-term incumbent Democrat Birch Bayh. Making Indiana political history again, Quayle was reelected to the Senate in 1986 with the largest margin ever achieved to that date by a candidate in a statewide Indiana race. His 1986 victory was notable because several other Republican Senators elected in 1980 were not returned to office.”</p>
<p>What a joke. Then why did he try to pretend he was FOR the bill and helped get it passed afterwards? If John McCain cheated on his wife (oops, he did!), you’d praise him for “mavericking” the rules of marriage.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obama is ahead because, far more than any white or black politician, he has reminded people of the likes of JFK and RFK. Does his race have something to do with it? Of course it does. It’s part of who he is. But to think that you could stick any old black person with the alleged help of the mythical “liberal media” is just spiteful stupidity.</p>