Bring on the debates!

Tybee

CAGiversary!
Feedback
4 (100%)
The first of three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate is coming up Friday, Sept. 26. As of today, the conditions for the debates have been finalized with the debate commission and Obama will be hunkering down in Florida all week to prepare. Seems like he and his folks have preparations well in hand. McCain less so, but the guy's perfectly capable. Palin, on the other hand.....

First debate
Sept. 26 at University of Mississippi
Topic: Foreign policy and national security
Moderator: Jim Lehrer of PBS
Staging: Podiums
Format: Broken into nine 9-minute segments. The moderator will introduce a topic and allow each candidate 2 minutes to comment, then facilitate a discussion for the remaining 5 minutes.


Vice Presidential debate
Oct. 2 at Washington University in St. Louis
Moderator: Gwen Ifill of PBS
Format: At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates. McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive.


Second debate
Oct. 7 at Belmont University in Nashville.
Moderator: Tom Brokaw of NBC
Staging: Town hall
Format: The moderator will call on members of the audience (and draw questions from the Internet). Each candidate will have 2 minutes to respond to each question. Following those initial answers, the moderator will invite the candidates to respond to the previous answers, for a total of 1 minute.

Third debate
Oct. 15 at Hofstra University in Hempstead, N.Y.
Topic: Domestic and economic policy
Moderator:Bob Schieffer of CBS
Staging: Seated at a table
Format: Same as first presidential debate, plus each candidate will get a 90-second closing statement.


From the NY Times:

September 21, 2008
Pact on Debates Will Let McCain and Obama Spar

By PATRICK HEALY

The Obama and McCain campaigns have agreed to an unusual free-flowing format for the three televised presidential debates, which begin on Friday, but the McCain camp fought for and won a much more structured approach for the questioning at the vice-presidential debate, advisers to both campaigns said Saturday.

At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates.

McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive.

The wrangling was chiefly between the McCain-Palin camp and the nonpartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which is sponsoring the forums.
Commission members wanted a relaxed format that included time for unpredictable questioning and challenges between the vice-presidential candidates. Last week, it rejected a proposal from advisers to Ms. Palin and Senator John McCain of Arizona, the Republican presidential nominee, for few if any unfettered exchanges. Advisers to Mr. Biden say they were comfortable with either format.

Both campaigns see the four debates as pivotal moments in a presidential race that is not only extraordinarily close but also drawing intense interest from voters; roughly 40 million viewers watched the major speeches at the two parties’ conventions. The upheaval in the financial markets has recast the race in recent days, moreover, which both sides believe will only heighten attention for the debates.

A commission member said that the new agreement on the vice-presidential debate was reached late morning Saturday. It calls for shorter blocks of candidate statements and open discussion than at the presidential debates.

McCain advisers said they were only somewhat concerned about Ms. Palin’s debating skills compared with those of Mr. Biden, who has served six terms in the Senate, or about his chances of tripping her up. Instead, they say, they wanted Ms. Palin to have opportunities to present Mr. McCain’s positions, rather than spending time talking about her own experience or playing defense.

While the debates between presidential nominees are traditionally the main events in the fall election season, the public interest in Ms. Palin has proved extraordinary, and a large audience is expected for her debate debut.

Indeed, both the McCain and Obama campaigns have similar concerns about the vice-presidential matchup in St. Louis: that Ms. Palin, of Alaska, as a new player in national politics, or Mr. Biden, of Delaware, as a loquacious and gaffe-prone speaker, could commit a momentum-changing misstep in their debate.

The negotiations for the three 90-minute debates between the men at the top of the tickets were largely free of brinksmanship. Neither side threatened to pull out, and concerns about camera angles and stagecraft were been minor.

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the Democratic nominee for president, and Mr. McCain did not intercede personally to settle any disputes. They agreed to one substantive change to the format originally proposed by the debate commission, giving them two minutes apiece to make a statement at the beginning of each segment on a new topic.

Mr. Obama successfully sought to flip the proposed topics for the first and third debates, so foreign policy is now coming first and economic and other domestic issues come last. There is a second debate, in the format of a town hall meeting, in which the candidates will sit on director’s chairs and take questions from the audience and Internet users on any topic.

The debate commission had proposed that the first debate be on economic issues, and the third on foreign policy — in part, people involved in the process said, because the first debate is usually the most watched, and many voters rank the economy as their top concern.

Mr. Obama wanted foreign policy first to show viewers that he could provide depth, strength and intelligence on those issues, his advisers said, given that Mr. McCain consistently wins higher ratings in opinion polls as a potential commander in chief.

Mr. Obama wanted domestic issues to come last; advisers said that they believed even before the start of the financial crisis that the election was most likely to turn on the state of the economy and that he wanted the final televised exchange to focus on those concerns. He has argued that Mr. McCain would continue the economic policies of President Bush.

Mr. McCain also wanted foreign policy topics to come first in the debates, his aides said, in the hope of capitalizing on his positive reputation on national security issues across party lines.

He wanted limits on the original format for the first and third debates, which had been nine topics with nine minutes of free-flowing debate on each one. Mr. Obama went along, though his aides did insist that at least several minutes of open-ended debate occur in each bloc of questioning, because they believe he does well in that format.

Now each presidential candidate will give two-minute statements on each topic, followed by five minutes of them openly debating and questioning each other.
Obama aides also agreed to use lecterns at the first event, which Mr. McCain preferred; at the third debate, the two men will be seated at a round table, in the 10 o’clock and 2 o’clock positions, with the moderator at 6 o’clock.

McCain aides said that they were conscious of the fact that Mr. McCain has a prominent scar on one side of his face, and that they could not predict how prominent it would appear with the camera angles, lighting and make-up.

The debate formats were negotiated by Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, representing the McCain campaign, and Representative Rahm Emanuel, Democrat of Illinois, for the Obama camp. A handful of aides from both camps were also involved, hammering out issues between themselves and then holding conference calls with members of the commission to reach final agreements, people involved in the process said.

Mr. Obama plans to begin debate camp on Tuesday with a tight circle of advisers at a site near Tampa Bay, in Florida, his aides say, with a prominent Democratic lawyer, Greg Craig, playing the part of Mr. McCain in mock debates.

The Obama campaign has been studying Mr. McCain’s debate performances from the Republican primary as well as in his 2000 race for president. Each debate has been rated and scored, with briefing points and highlights sent to Mr. Obama.

Mr. Obama’s advisers have been reviewing Mr. McCain’s debates with George W. Bush from the 2000 Republican primary, studying in particular his temperament and mood and looking for potential flash points of anger.

Mr. McCain, his advisers say, has yet to spend much time watching the dozens of primary debate performances of Mr. Obama over the last two years. But they said that a small staff of aides had been reviewing them and that Mr. McCain would see some highlights from them next week.

McCain aides refused to say when his debate camp would be or where, or who was playing Mr. Obama or Mr. Biden. (Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm, Democrat of Michigan, is playing Ms. Palin for Mr. Biden’s preparations.)

Mr. Obama plans to sequester himself and a small number of advisers at his debate camp. The attendance is limited to a small group of foreign policy advisers, each rotating in for separate sessions with Mr. Obama and Mr. Craig.

The choice of Florida, particularly the politically critical region near Tampa, was selected with a dual purpose in mind. While Mr. Obama will have few public events from Tuesday through Friday, aides said, his presence could draw considerable local news media attention in a state where he hopes to fiercely challenge Mr. McCain.

While the intense portion of debate training begins on Tuesday, Mr. Obama has been preparing for weeks, in part by drawing upon his experience debating Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York in the Democratic primaries. His aides have been studying those debate performances to address one of his biggest shortcomings: his ability to deliver a tight answer. Already, his campaign is trying to diminish expectations for Mr. Obama’s performance.

“Despite the fact that we got the chance to do this a lot during the primaries, these debates are not by any stretch of the imagination his strong suit,” said Robert Gibbs, a senior strategist to Mr. Obama. “He likes to talk about a problem, give some examples that addresses some solutions and oftentimes that doesn’t fit into the moderator’s allotted time.”

The campaigns had no say over the choice of moderators — Jim Lehrer of PBS, Tom Brokaw of NBC and Bob Schieffer of CBS for the presidential debates, and Gwen Ifill of PBS for the vice-presidential debate.

“Everything matters and issues can always come up, such as the size of podiums — like for Carter and Ford in 1976 — to the timer lights if the candidate doesn’t like them,” said Tad Devine, a Democratic strategist who advised Al Gore in 2000 and John Kerry in 2004. “There hasn’t really been a ‘debate about the debates’ this year, but that can change in a minute.”

Jeff Zeleny contributed reporting from Miami.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sept. 30 is a Tuesday.

The first debate is 10/2. I'll be in Houston reffin' the Western regional WFTDA tournament for three days, so I'll be out of the political loop that whole time.

Palin doesn't stand a chance against Biden.
 
Very excited to watch.. as for the V.P debates...not anymore..


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us/politics/21debate.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

"At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates. McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive."
 
Again...makes you wonder why the Democrats allow the Republicans to pull this shit.

EVERY fuckin' time. She's being protected from being exposed, and the GOP is hoping that dumbass America will hold onto their Tiger Beat crush on her long enough to go to the election booth in 6 weeks.

The very blatant measures they're going to to protect her from being exposed as inexperienced, unaware, and blissfully incompetent to become president.

Hell, watch Biden make intellectual mincemeat of her, and throw in a few Biden-quality jabs at her. And the result will be that Palin goes up in the polls because Biden was "too hard on her." Then we're going to elect McCain because we collectively felt sorry for poor wittle Sawah Pawin.

I think part of the debates should involve a knife fight. If you can't survive a knife fight, you shouldn't be president. If you can't handle a few insults, you shouldn't even be allowed to visit the White House as a tourist.
 
I actually think that limiting the back and forth between the candidates could work well for the Democrats so that they can avoid the Biden was too hard on her complaint. Let's face it, she will screw up the script at least once during the debate and this way they will be able to limit the GOP playing of the sympathy card.
 
33% of the people could vote before the debates are finished. I think that is a terrible idea.

The debate dates...



  • September 26: Oxford, Mississippi
  • October 7: Nashville, Tennessee
  • October 15: Hempstead, New York
  • Vice presidential debate: October 2, St. Louis, Missouri
 
[quote name='homeland']Very excited to watch.. as for the V.P debates...not anymore..


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/us/politics/21debate.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

"At the insistence of the McCain campaign, the Oct. 2 debate between the Republican nominee for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, and her Democratic rival, Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr., will have shorter question-and-answer segments than those for the presidential nominees, the advisers said. There will also be much less opportunity for free-wheeling, direct exchanges between the running mates. McCain advisers said they had been concerned that a loose format could leave Ms. Palin, a relatively inexperienced debater, at a disadvantage and largely on the defensive."[/QUOTE]

Same here.. I can't wait for the pres debates, but it's pretty damn obvious that the VP debate will be nothing but Palin reciting the Rove talking points...

*sigh*

The McCain campaign expects you to vote for them without knowing their VP... it's so sad that this is happening. It's a slap in the face to democracy, to have a presidential campaign completely hide and shield one of the candidates and still be 40+ in the polls... really, what the hell does that say of democracy?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Mississippi, Missouri, Tennessee, and New York?

fuck you, western states![/QUOTE]

Because the location matters, since this is 1920 and no one has television or internet, right?
 
[quote name='niceguyshawne']I actually think that limiting the back and forth between the candidates could work well for the Democrats so that they can avoid the Biden was too hard on her complaint. Let's face it, she will screw up the script at least once during the debate and this way they will be able to limit the GOP playing of the sympathy card.[/quote]

I agree with this. Everyone here seems to want to see Sarah Palin stripped to the waist and flogged (I know I do), but I really think that would backfire on the Dems. Given Biden's penchant for casual sexism and condescension, it's a very real risk that given the opportunity to drone on at length, he'd only have more time to make himself look bad. What Palin doesn't know, she doesn't know, and I'd wager she's never debated before in her life. And that will be obvious. You don't need a "free form" format to reveal her unsuitability for national office.

I think the big relief for me is that the VP debate is being moderated by Gwen Ifill, which makes it much harder for Palin and co. to play the sexism card. Gwen's going to ask her something, she's going to give a stupid, incomplete, or rote answer, and everyone's just going to roll their eyes.

Of course, Ifill is black, so it wouldn't surprise me in the least if McCain's people float the idea that that makes her in the tank for Obama.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Again...makes you wonder why the Democrats allow the Republicans to pull this shit.

EVERY fuckin' time. She's being protected from being exposed, and the GOP is hoping that dumbass America will hold onto their Tiger Beat crush on her long enough to go to the election booth in 6 weeks.

The very blatant measures they're going to to protect her from being exposed as inexperienced, unaware, and blissfully incompetent to become president.

Hell, watch Biden make intellectual mincemeat of her, and throw in a few Biden-quality jabs at her. And the result will be that Palin goes up in the polls because Biden was "too hard on her." Then we're going to elect McCain because we collectively felt sorry for poor wittle Sawah Pawin.

I think part of the debates should involve a knife fight. If you can't survive a knife fight, you shouldn't be president. If you can't handle a few insults, you shouldn't even be allowed to visit the White House as a tourist.[/QUOTE]

The reason they are letting them get away with it is because Palin is a woman and they are scared how they will look bloodying her nose. Personally I think gender be damned he should make her cry. I would fly across the country and pay top dollar to get in to a real debate between them if I knew Biden wasnt going to pull punches. I think he would not only make Palin his bitch but make her cry in the process...as I said id love to be right there to lick the tears off her pretty little face.
 
[quote name='Tybee']
I think the big relief for me is that the VP debate is being moderated by Gwen Ifill, which makes it much harder for Palin and co. to play the sexism card. Gwen's going to ask her something, she's going to give a stupid, incomplete, or rote answer, and everyone's just going to roll their eyes.

Of course, Ifill is black, so it wouldn't surprise me in the least if McCain's people float the idea that that makes her in the tank for Obama.[/QUOTE]

I think no matter who moderates the debate, they are going to get flogged for something by the McCain camp. I never really heard about Charlie Gibson being a pillar of the Liberal media until after the Bush Doctrine question.
 
[quote name='bigdaddy']33% of the people could vote before the debates are finished. I think that is a terrible idea.

The debate dates...



  • September 26: Oxford, Mississippi
  • October 7: Nashville, Tennessee
  • October 15: Hempstead, New York
  • Vice presidential debate: October 2, St. Louis, Missouri
[/quote]
Wow, here in TN.
 
I think Obama and McCain just want to go to the music sights there. That debate is a "Town Hall Debate", the first is McCain's favorite, bomb bomb bomb Iran, and then the last is domestic issues like... the economy! Which is why I think it's a terrible idea to let so many people vote so early.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']Wow, here in TN.[/quote]


At Belmont University in Nashville... I thought it would be at Vanderbilt University
 
So let me get this straight, from this thread so far:

  • Being good at debate, automatically makes you an awesome president or VP, and would totally more than make up for any lacking experience.
  • Biden is fantastic at arguing and condescension. If Palin is not, that automatically makes Biden a better VP.
  • Issues be damned, it's all about how well you can debate.
  • What you believe is not nearly as important as how well you can argue.
Do I have it right so far?

Frankly, given Biden and McCain's past of emotional instabilities, those are qualities that frighten the hell out of me in anyone in a position of power, no matter how well they can "debate".

In general positions of high stress situations of leadership, I would take someone that can keep their cool and work through things methodically and level headed (Obama and Palin) over a reactionary fantastic debater (Biden, McCain) any day. That's possibly more important to me than the issues they believe.

This is why I think I'd much prefer to see Obama and Palin debate. I think you would come a way with far more articulate policy information. I am not interested in seeing a lot of finger pointing fire and brimstone in debates.

That said, I think if the Republicans were smart (They aren't) they would try to encourage a situation where Biden went full attack dog on her, as it is pretty much guaranteed to only help them. And Democrats should know that taking the leashes off their pit-bull won't impress anyone except the rabid Palin haters, and they don't make up enough votes.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']from this thread so far:

  • Being good at debate, automatically makes you an awesome president or VP, and would totally more than make up for any lacking experience.
  • Biden is fantastic at arguing and condescension. If Palin is not, that automatically makes Biden a better VP.
  • Issues be damned, it's all about how well you can debate.
  • What you believe is not nearly as important as how well you can argue.
[/QUOTE]

Care to cite your sources with a little more specificity than "this thread"? 'Cause I don't see it.

The reason fighting for the structured format is a dig on Palin is because it allows her to recite the Rove talking points instead of actually talking about the issues. When she says a bullshit talking point, Biden can't pin her to the inconsistencies. When she says she opposed the bridge to nowhere, Biden can't jump in seconds later to point out that she supported it and took the money and demand a response... without that back and forth she (shocker coming up!!) isn't going to be held accountable for any of the bullshit she recites. So far, that's all the McCain campaign has been about... shield Palin from taking the blame she earned. Be it a bipartisan ethics investigation determined necessary by her state lawmakers, citizens in Alaska asking the governor's office about Todd, her bridge flop, her association with oil lobbies, her record earmark requests, the lobbyist she hired to get them, etc... no matter what it is, the McCain campaign sends out their hired guns to talk for her. Like, having a McCain campaign spokesman to "speak" (or rather not speak) on her behalf through the governor's mansion to Alaskan citizens questioning Alaskan actions... it's amazing.

Them fighting for this structured format is just another drop in a huge bucket full of hide-Palin-from-America-until-she's-in-the-whitehouse. You can drink it if you want, I won't.

I'm too wordy when I've been drinking... this could all be said in like a sentence or two but oh well.
 
Koggit,

Most of what you list, imo, really shouldn't be addressed in a debate. A political debate isn't about throwing all the dirty laundry out about the opposition. That's why they usually have moderators and just do QA back and forth or are given subjects to discuss. What you are talking about is more appropriate for interviews with journalists (like Gibson), I think.

I really don't wan't to see McCain start talking about Reverend Wright either. It's not what a debate is for. What you propose is essentially each candidate interviewing each other.

But it's very possible I have an abnormal opinion of what a debate is. I just recall the Bush/Kerry debates not really throwing so much dirty heresay between candidates, but I could be suffering from memory loss, it's late.
 
No I'm not saying Biden should bring that stuff up, I don't think Biden should just say "WHOA HO HO WHAT ABOUT THAT BRIDGE" out of the blue, I'm saying Palin will bring that stuff up and, due to the format, will get away with it. The moderator will ask a question about the debt and Palin will rail on earmarks... in a situation like that, she should be questioned about all the earmarks she requested as mayor and governor. Someone who claims earmarks are ruining America requested millions for a town of 5,000 and hundreds of millions for a state of 500,000... when she says she'll put an end to earmarks she needs to be questioned about her history, and a moderator doesn't do that. In a regular debate it's Biden's place to then bring it up, then she should have to respond and defend. That's not gonna happen. The McCain campaign doesn't want it to happen.

The same goes for accountability. I guarantee you're going to hear Palin mention "hold[ing] congress accountable", I absolutely guarantee you're hear it because it's one of Rove's favorite talking points, and when she says that there needs to be someone on the other side mentioning her unaccountability as mayor and governor, refusing to participate with the investigation her bipartisan lawmakers decided upon and refusing to answer questions directly about the librarian that was fired.

There are a lot of issues like that -- a lot of evidence completely counter the things she cites as evidence for reform -- that she will never have to confront because of the structured format... she'll mention a lot of bullshit and nobody's going to call her out on it because it isn't even a real debate.
 
Don't you know better then to talk sense around here? CAG is your home for all things anti-Republican. I mean just look at the front page of the Cag vs. mode; Politics & Controversy to see that Republicans be damned, they are evil and nothing positive can be thought here or it's the cornfield for you! Not one thread that is even neutral to Republican much less positive.

But seriously just let everyone hate, if CAG were actually representative of the whole country Republicans, those that survived, would be slaves to the almighty Democrats.

This whole thread is just completely one sided that the chess piece guy can't even see examples in everyone's post that all they care about is not a lively debate about the issues of the day, but Biden laying the smackdown on Palin for a comment about a bridge. And seriously if you want to talk about earmarks, Obama has $750 million in earmarks which I will be happy to provide a link to because I know everyone here is having a hell of a time finding a flaw in Obama even though he went to church for 20 years and was good friends with a pastor known for his hate speeches against whites and the US.

I for one hope that the debates actually consist about the ideas of the candidates and what they promise to do for the country, than picking on Palin's bridge comment or Biden's "I don't think Obama is ready to lead this country" comment during the Democratic primaries.

[quote name='thrustbucket']So let me get this straight, from this thread so far:

  • Being good at debate, automatically makes you an awesome president or VP, and would totally more than make up for any lacking experience.
  • Biden is fantastic at arguing and condescension. If Palin is not, that automatically makes Biden a better VP.
  • Issues be damned, it's all about how well you can debate.
  • What you believe is not nearly as important as how well you can argue.
Do I have it right so far?

Frankly, given Biden and McCain's past of emotional instabilities, those are qualities that frighten the hell out of me in anyone in a position of power, no matter how well they can "debate".

In general positions of high stress situations of leadership, I would take someone that can keep their cool and work through things methodically and level headed (Obama and Palin) over a reactionary fantastic debater (Biden, McCain) any day. That's possibly more important to me than the issues they believe.

This is why I think I'd much prefer to see Obama and Palin debate. I think you would come a way with far more articulate policy information. I am not interested in seeing a lot of finger pointing fire and brimstone in debates.

That said, I think if the Republicans were smart (They aren't) they would try to encourage a situation where Biden went full attack dog on her, as it is pretty much guaranteed to only help them. And Democrats should know that taking the leashes off their pit-bull won't impress anyone except the rabid Palin haters, and they don't make up enough votes.[/QUOTE]
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']Don't you know better then to talk sense around here? CAG is your home for all things anti-Republican. I mean just look at the front page of the Cag vs. mode; Politics & Controversy to see that Republicans be damned, they are evil and nothing positive can be thought here or it's the cornfield for you! Not one thread that is even neutral to Republican much less positive.
[/QUOTE]

Well first of all, I am anti-Republican too. I'm also anti-Democrat. I think the two party system is responsible for more harm to our country since anything since the civil war.

In other forums, where Republicans run around talking as if they have done nothing wrong and will save the country, I bash the shit out of them.

But part of why I stick around here is the anti-Republicanism. It's so rampant, so blatant, so age-old stereotypical, I can't help but jump in and bring some ying to all the yang.
 
[quote name='jputahraptor']Don't you know better then to talk sense around here? CAG is your home for all things anti-Republican. I mean just look at the front page of the Cag vs. mode; Politics & Controversy to see that Republicans be damned, they are evil and nothing positive can be thought here or it's the cornfield for you! Not one thread that is even neutral to Republican much less positive.

But seriously just let everyone hate, if CAG were actually representative of the whole country Republicans, those that survived, would be slaves to the almighty Democrats.[/quote]

If CAG were representative of Republicans on the whole, we'd have to add a thread for our elderly community.

This whole thread is just completely one sided that the chess piece guy can't even see examples in everyone's post that all they care about is not a lively debate about the issues of the day, but Biden laying the smackdown on Palin for a comment about a bridge. And seriously if you want to talk about earmarks, Obama has $750 million in earmarks which I will be happy to provide a link to because I know everyone here is having a hell of a time finding a flaw in Obama even though he went to church for 20 years and was good friends with a pastor known for his hate speeches against whites and the US.

Yes, because Obama is perfect. That's not a straw man. The discussion here centers around the fact that a combination of white privilege, idiocy, and partisan allegiance have it such that a mayor of a town of 6,000 and a governor of a state with a population below that of Chicago, who has virtually no experience doing anything in terms of foreign policy, and who has lied to your face about what she stands for and how that contrasts to what she does, who has been hidden from the press like she's Angelina Jolie's latest adoption acquisition, who has only been asked questions by two people in the press - both of them such kid-glove covered interviews that the protection of her by her campaign becomes that much more glaring, is capable of, without any gut-busting laughter, being compared to a person who has been involved in local and national politics for over a decade, who has been involved in his community for over 2 decades, and who has an educational pedigree that most politicians would kill for.

The discussion is not that of policy, for you wouldn't have mentioned Obama's earmarks (which isn't the point, again - Palin's quarter-billion in earmark requests exhibit someone who apparently isn't against government misspending the way she tells you IS the point, however). You'd compare their policies.

You'd tell me - and please do - what it is, on a policy level, on an experience level - what does Sarah Palin add to McCain's ticket? With Biden we cover up Obama's foreign policy experience. With Palin we do what with McCain? Add foreign policy experience? Add energy experience? Military experience? Economic experience? She's already been shown to be untrustworthy on that last one, so what, should I ask, is her *function* on the ticket? I see a cynical attempt to woo idiot voters who seem to think woman=woman=woman. I see an empty suit who offers nothing but the kind of Weberian charismatic authority that doesn't really carry anything of substance underneath it.

I for one hope that the debates actually consist about the ideas of the candidates and what they promise to do for the country, than picking on Palin's bridge comment or Biden's "I don't think Obama is ready to lead this country" comment during the Democratic primaries.

Yeah. I can't wait to hear Palin's policy proposals. Maybe then the debate will end early and I can tuck into a game of Warhawk instead of watch it.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']I hope Obama's choice of Biden doesn't come back to bite him in the ass. Biden has been criticizing Obama's own campaign lately.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080923/ap_on_el_pr/obama[/quote]

I actually found this refreshing. To me, that's the difference between the two campaigns. McCain, confronted with his campaign's lies and dissemination, has gotten indignant, played the "Well they did it first" card, or simply denied any wrongdoing. I think Biden should be commended for saying, "Ya know, I think we maybe crossed a line on this one, and I'm sorry about it." Good for him.
 
[quote name='Koggit']Foreign party experience isn't that big of a deal[/quote]

That's actually pretty try, but having ANY experience at all would help.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I have foreign party experience with female Czech grad students.

HUZZAH![/quote]

Sadly that is more experience than who will most likely be president some day.
 
[quote name='Koggit']Foreign party experience isn't that big of a deal[/quote]
:lol: Wow i really screwed that up didn't I. Wrote that at work between some things.
Fixed.
 
bread's done
Back
Top