Obama is blowing it...who the hell is advising him???

Okay, say you have two choices.

Play by the Marques of Queensbury rules in a street fight and lose.

Or do what it takes to win.

If you lose, McCain becomes president, and Palin is a heartbeat away.

In a street fight, there are no rules, no referee, no moderator, nothing like that.

What rules do we have in a presidential election between candidates?

If a candidate lies, like McCain has been doing about things, yet the people believe McCain anyway despite the attempts by the press to demonstrate the lies...because the right has repeatedly said the press cannot be trusted because they are left wing...then what are you going to do about it?

Do you remember how Cheney lied at the debates with Edwards in 2004, multiple times he lied...did the voters seem to care?

Why is it so acceptable to the voters when a politicians lies anyway?

Just sit back and say "The system is broken and McCain will get in, and people are stupid, but I can't do anything about it?"

On this message board don't you see continually the use of lies, logical fallacy, bullying tactics, etc.?

Does that mean it is right to stoop to that level?

No, of course not...but this is not a presidential race in which so much depends on the outcome.

It really comes down to the voters, and the voters have shown a proclivity for generations of falling for the same dirty tricks and ignoring issues, buying into the projection of an image rather than the reality.

Obama projected an image to the dems, and that image beat Hillary. His image was one of change, a strategy the repubs have now scurrilously adopted in regards to McCain being a reformer (which he hasn't been for at least a couple of years) and Palin also being a reformer.

So now both sides are saying they are about change, so it takes away the advantage of Obama now. Dumbass voters thing McCain is really about change, completely ignoring his position on the issues and his record of supporting Bush about 90 to 95% of the time.

That won't work in a general election, which is why I was and still am concerned about the electability of Obama.

If the press were worth their salt, they would be trying to educate voters on how to listen to politicians, how to spot lies, how to spot logical fallacy arguments...which are primarily appeals to the emotion, not reason.

However, do the people really want to put reason over their own emotions when deciding who is president?

It would appear not...

 

Obama is trying for talking points, but my point remains that the Democrats in general need to repeat the same phrases over and over as the Republicans do.

If you watch the Daily Show they show clips of Republicans repeating the exact same phrase, the exact same wording like little machines.

And, unfortunately, it works.

 

I hear you, although the most recent Newsweek poll puts them tied.

Undoubtedly McCain received a small post convention bump.

 

Small? On Intrade he went from 35 (off a 29 low) to 44 in a couple of days and now up to 51.

 

I agree. It is unreal how badly the Dems are handling this. They deserve to lose if they don't get their shit together. Did they learn nothing in '04?

By the way, I know that you mean about not believing that 'he is this stupid'. But one thing I have realized is that Obama, although carrying the cred of having an actual concern for helping people less fortunate than him, isn't a politician. He's saying what he thinks he needs to say but he's no good at making political calculations. The interview a few nights back revealed to me, for the first time, that he may be a little more hat than cattle in terms of having the overall vision (I mean an image of the real as opposed to the theoretically desirable) that we would want in a President. That was a perfect opportunity for him to be very specific about what it is he intends to do. I didn't really get a bunch of that although I didn't see the whole thing.

 

This is Obama's first ever one on one campaign against a white candidate. He truly lacks election experience.

He breezed into the Illinois Senate by using a cheap petition challenge against a venerable black woman incumbent, knocking her off the ballot in the Dem primary. She would've won easily. He then never faced Republican opposition in his 90% Democrat district. (I don't even know if we put anyone on the ballot)

He ran in the Dem 2000 Congressional primary against Bobby Rush and was clobbered 2-1. In the 2004 Dem U.S. Senate he paralleled this years advantage in the primaries as the lone black in a crowded white field. In the General he was essentially handed the seat when Jack Ryan-ex-husband of actress Jeri-was forced off the GOP ticket because of her over the top allegations in their divorce decree. The GOP desperately brought in out of stater Alan Keyes and the rest is history.

In fact , Obama lost the only truly contested 1-1 of his career. That being Rush.

He's a formula candidate and that works best in multi-candidate primaries where the attention is divided. The Axelrod model makes use of candidate appeal, imagery and message but is purposely opaque on issues. If people know where you stand specifically they might vote against you. Everyone polls for “change”, “saving the environment” and “education.” Great he has a zillion page website on “issues”. Does the nation though have an iota of a clue if he intends to follow up on previous statements about Pakistan? By running to the middle on security he actually scares people. Further he's flipped on so many important core issues-military policy, taxes, campaign finance ect. that the swing independents who were lock step behind him during the image part of the vetting are
less inclined to find him definable vs. McCain.

The Obama campaign has blundered in a few ways. For starters they came out of the gate with their usual grammar school taunts of McBush, McSame ect. Ha Ha, so clever. The joke was on them because everyone in America knows that McCain hates Bush's guts. Many think McCain voted Gore in 2000. McCain was tepid on the Iraq effort, an advocate of the surge well before the admin, voted against the Bush tax cuts because there weren't accompanying spending cuts-hell he's been the antithesis of Bush. Just enough educated swing voters know that.

Secondly Biden was a horse shit pick. Picking a guy with experience usually means with baggage and Bidens yea on Iraq, yea on the BK bill and yea to having a millionaire lobbyist for a son doesn't exactly buttress the whole “change” thing. Plus he's a shrill, wind bagging partisan with zero cross over appeal.

Lastly Obama should have reigned in his friends in the blogosphere after Palin was selected. Half her popularity is soccer mom rebuttal to the liberals initial, hateful remarks about her. Guy's should know better. Chicks stick together and get pissed about criticism. Obama should be condescendingly dismissive towards her. That works with chicks. Try it guys. Never let them see you sweat......

 

Again, I appreciate that you like Intrade, but it's not reflective of actual polls. I'm not even sure of the significance of it at all.

 

What did you think of his website?

 

Because the market filters the bs out of the polls. There's ZERO predictive value but I subscribe to the Bruce Kovner rule-at this moment in time the markets correct "value" is the last print.

 

So when you go outside, rather than reading the temperature, you subscribe to some sort of temperature market to tell you what the temperature is?

You know, because the market is more accurate than a thermometer.