The Yes We CAG Movement - Now to win the Presidency!

But would a centrist rather have a good central front man or a central back man? In most cases, your front is your strongest card.

Also, Bayh won't help in the overall scheme of things. If Obama picked Kaine (Virginia) he would win the Presidency easy.

EDIT: MSNBC says Kaine and Bayh have been told they aren't it. If he picks the Kansas woman, he really makes Hillary supporters mad. If he picks Biden...what does Biden add?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']someone thats a more central seems like a good pick. mccain appeals to monderates and independents big time.[/quote]


Yeah, that is why I haven't decided who I like better at this point. I'll be honest, as much as I don't care for Sen. Liebermann, if he and McCain managed to team up that would be very interesting.
 
McCain needs to pick a grassroots Republican to rally the base. If he picks Lieberman, he's going to make a lot of people angry....again.

Text messages go out in the morning from the Obama camp.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Yeah, that is why I haven't decided who I like better at this point. I'll be honest, as much as I don't care for Sen. Liebermann, if he and McCain managed to team up that would be very interesting.[/QUOTE]

if the ticket is mccain liebermann they wouldnt get my vote. doesnt mean obama would automatically get it, i still might just write in ron paul. im split between the 3.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']McCain needs to pick a grassroots Republican to rally the base. If he picks Lieberman, he's going to make a lot of people angry....again.

[/quote]

They'll get over it because hardcore Republicans will vote (R) (D) ticket before a (D) (D) any day. Besides, for all the talk of change this year a (R) (D) ticket is one of the few things that will really be a change whether people like it or not.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']They'll get over it because hardcore Republicans will vote (R) (D) ticket before a (D) (D) any day. Besides, for all the talk of change this year a (R) (D) ticket is one of the few things that will really be a change whether people like it or not.[/quote]

You're assuming of course that they'd actually vote.
 
McCain/Lieberman would be an (R)(I) ticket.

Lieberman is less of a Democrat than Zell Miller. Even if it was a phony identification, at least Miller kept his (D).
 
[quote name='mykevermin']McCain/Lieberman would be an (R)(I) ticket.

Lieberman is less of a Democrat than Zell Miller. Even if it was a phony identification, at least Miller kept his (D).[/quote]

Why would Republicans, the grassroot ones accept Lieberman, someone more left wing than McCain, already on the cusp on the left? These people are going to stay home if McCain does that.

And if you've noticed trends in politics, you would know that the people that are talked about leading up to the revelation are almost never picked as a running mate.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']McCain/Lieberman would be an (R)(I) ticket.

Lieberman is less of a Democrat than Zell Miller. Even if it was a phony identification, at least Miller kept his (D).[/quote]

I hear you, but until he gets the (D) off...

[quote name='KingBroly']Why would Republicans, the grassroot ones accept Lieberman, someone more left wing than McCain, already on the cusp on the left?
[/quote]

The war.

Unless Obama has Zombie Reagan as his running mate.
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']I hear you, but until he gets the (D) off...



The war.

Unless Obama has Zombie Reagan as his running mate.[/quote]

The war? The war's pretty much a non-issue in this campaign, unless you mean with Russia.
 
[quote name='KingBroly']Why would Republicans, the grassroot ones accept Lieberman, someone more left wing than McCain, already on the cusp on the left? These people are going to stay home if McCain does that.

And if you've noticed trends in politics, you would know that the people that are talked about leading up to the revelation are almost never picked as a running mate.[/QUOTE]

I think McCain is electable, entirely, with someone less conservative than he (even if I would argue that Lieberman is not less conservative ;)).

This sort of dichotomous thinking is problematic in modern American politics. Instead of going for the middle and fighting for 58% of the vote (let's be realistic, 58% of the vote is a KO in an election), we're seeing parties, particularly the Republicans in the past 2 elections, going for extremists. Those scared of gays having equal protection under the law, those scared of the amorphous "terrorism," those who want to legislate the Bible.

In the process, they're shooting for the "mandate" that came with Bush's 51% of the vote in 2004. They split the country in half and then scared their constituents just enough to get them out in greater numbers.

So McCain, I'd argue, is MORE electable were he to choose a more centrist candidate. This mining to the extremes of either side is a fool's errand, as you're aiming for a target that, if it works, will BARELY get you elected, as opposed to aiming for a target that's harder to hit, but more rewarding in the process.
 
The point of a good vp is to make up your weaknesses... Bayh would be great because Obama's viewed as far left, he needs balance. Likewise McCain should pick someone far right, since most view him as left-leaning for a republican. You have to appeal to a broad crowd, and if you're already viewed as far left you don't want a far left vp.
 
If Obama picked Biden, I think he's toast. Biden doesn't really add anything to the ticket other than experience, but it can only get him so far because of his baggage, and that will definitely be used against him, hurting the ticket as well. If Obama picked the Kansas woman (name escapes me) he still lacks the experience check (or half a check), while keeping his slogan of "change and hope" may be good, it'll make the Hillary supports even more mad than before. She might give him a couple of points in Kansas, but McCain will still win the state.

And this Chet guy I keep hearing about, you pick him, you lose a Congressional seat (although meaningless in the grander scheme) and you gain nothing because his experience means nothing due to the overall lack of name ID. It also doesn't give him points anywhere.

If Obama picks 1 of these 3, and all signs are now pointing to Biden, the ticket is weak.
 
I honestly dont think Obama's gonna lose no matter who he picks for vp... America is so sick of George Bush. War, oil, the economy, the environment... this year is going to be huge for dems, not just executive, regardless of weak candidates.
 
Obama should be up by 10-15 points right now. He's not. People are sick of seeing his face everywhere without anything new.
 
Perhaps if we didn't use the electoral college system there would be something to consider worrying about, due to racism and religion in the south, but as it stands there are quite a few swing states he could lose and he'd still win the election... and he's looking pretty damn good in most of those swing states anyway. He could win without Virginia, and will probably take Virginia. I really don't think the election will be close. Popular vote may have a narrower (
 
[quote name='KingBroly']wow dude. You're off the map. Goodnight.[/QUOTE]

I'd say you're the one off the map for writing off racism and the weirdo "he's a closet moo-slim!" nitwits out there.

EDIT: By the way, DRUDGE WAS WRONG!

Allow me, for the moment, a giant "HA-HA!" if you believed the whoremonger.
 
I really do not understand why conservatives despise McCain, he has been a consistent opponent of women's rights, and has voted with Bush 95% of the time. And of that 5 percent he took the opposing side, he's switched his views to align with Bush (voted against Bush tax cuts, now for them; opposed torture as a former POW, now accepts it; presented a bill for amnesty for illegal immigrants along with Ted Kennedy, now against it).

McCain is not even a shadow of his former self of 2000. He is not a maverick.

This election is Obama's to lose. I still believe he will break 300 electoral votes. He has put solid Republican states into play (Montana, North and South Dakota, Nevada, Colorado, Virginia, North Carolina, and Georgia), while McCain maybe has a chance to pull New Hampshire away.

CNN has confirmed Biden as the VP nominee. All things considered, following Edwards' scandal, he was the best choice, outside of Hillary. Despite the bitterness between the two, I think it may have been necessary to pull her supporters in. Anyway, Biden brings some things that Obama needed nationally -- Foreign policy experience and a guy who will tear apart McCain and whomever he chooses. Biden tells it like it is and he will allow Obama to take the high road by being the so-called "attack dog"
 
Repubs aren't happy because both candidates are economically liberal. McCain applies conservative moral values to a liberal economic policy, but he still favors a pretty large government.

This is a pretty good site, as far as predicting the election: http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Mouse-over each state to see the most recent polling. Click the state for a histogram. They keep everything up to date, it's a good site to bookmark. But don't look at it if you'd be bothered by Broly calling you "off the map"... whatever that means.
 
Republicans used to stand for fiscally conservative policies. Bush and the neoconservatives completely abandoned that principle, the only time in history with tax cuts during a war (a major part of the out of control spending and enormous defecit). I have not heard a major fiscal conservative backlash (though I am sure it exists, it just does not receive much media attention), but much more so a social/neoconservative one. Again, McCain and Bush are nearly identical on economic issues.
 
[quote name='freakyzeeky']Obama chose Biden as VP candidate... Can't say I'm too surprised though. ;)[/quote]

Are you sure about this? Yipee if so!
 
Ha- I wondering why, despite all the Biden talk over the last few days, the "articulate" comment made by Biden wasn't all over the place? I now know the answer, I wasn't watching Fox news.

Against my better judgment, I flipped over to Fox and the assault is already in full force. Greta Van Xenu was going on about how this pick negates Obama's message of change. And the ticker was chock full of handy tidbits, like Biden's vote on the use of force in Iraq and the aformentioned race comment.

Regardless, I was weary of Biden before because I didn't think he brought anything tot the campaign based on name alone. He doesn't bullshit much and I like that, but I didn't see where he could help on an electoral map. But I've changed my assessment and I realize that what Biden brings won't be so plainly visible. He obviously has a wealth of experience, including in foreign policy areas, which is a big plus. He was also born in PA and has a son who's going to be deployed to Iraq. Although, I'd like to see the campaign not exploit that fact beyond reproach.
 
[quote name='thenockmlb']Republicans used to stand for fiscally conservative policies. Bush and the neoconservatives completely abandoned that principle, the only time in history with tax cuts during a war (a major part of the out of control spending and enormous defecit). I have not heard a major fiscal conservative backlash (though I am sure it exists, it just does not receive much media attention), but much more so a social/neoconservative one. Again, McCain and Bush are nearly identical on economic issues.[/QUOTE]

Huh? Tax cuts during a war is conservative... conservative doesn't mean the government conserves their own money, it means the government only does what they have to. Conservative, politically, means a small federal government (less taxes, less federal programs, less federal control)... liberal is large government and, to pay for it, higher taxes.
 
Not that it matters but the news is saying the texts went out at 3AM EST. I just got mine at 2AM PST on the dot. Did anyone get the text on time?
 
McCain was trying to remember how many houses he had.

Give credit where credit's due: McCain can't even send an email without his wife's help. He had fuck-all to do with the video.
 
[quote name='Ruined']McCain didn't waste any time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDVUPqoowf8[/QUOTE]


What was wrong with that ad? What Biden said was his views at the time in his own words. How many ads have had things candidates have said in the past come back to haunt them. I don't want to piss all over the Obama love fest in here but that's fair game, it makes you wonder what happened in that time that changed his views. My theory is it's this or going back to being an unknown politican.
 
My theory is that you have two politicians running in presidential primaries, and you'd have a vast pasture of similar ad potential were McCain to select Romney, Giuliani, or anyone else who was in this year's primaries.

You're trying to create something with substance out of something that's just primary status quo.

Put another way: imagine the potential if Clinton was selected. Even greater, given the "hostilities" between the two during the primaries.

What's being discussed is akin to trying to create a real-world drama between players on opposite sports teams that have "words" prior to a big bout. It's like saying Tom Brady and Eli Manning have great disdain for each other.

OTOH, this as is great, now that I think about it.

1) BIDEN IS RELIABLE. If we accept what he says at face value, then Obama's chosen a sophisticated, respectable, viable, and ultimately ideal vice presidential candidate.

2) BIDEN IS UNRELIABLE. If we don't acept what he says, then we leave more suspicious of McCain, and curious about why such an unreliable character would consider him a colleague.
 
That's very, very damaging ad. Whether an intelligent viewer who understands Biden only said that because he wanted to win, or an average American that thinks part of the Obama ticket truly believes America would be better if McCain won... even if a person doesn't believe the ad, it's damaging to his image on the subconscious. The negative ad blitz has already done an astounding amount of damage to Obama's image through lies and deception (snob, muslim, terrorist, inexperienced, many many people now associate him with these things).
 
I'm happy with the pick of Biden. He's said some dumb stuff in the past (especially the comment about only being able to go to 7/11 or Dunkin Donuts if you have a slight Indian accent) which bothers me. But most everyone says stupid shit at some point in their lives so I can get over it.

As for him being critical of Obama earlier when he was in the race, I think that will blow over and be balanced out by people being happy that he choose a VP with a ton of foreign relations experience etc.
 
biden better watch out. obama has his eye on bidens wife.

capt.88cb2b162f784466a5a63016a89e1a9f.obama_2008_ilmg122.jpg
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']biden better watch out. obama has his eye on bidens wife.

capt.88cb2b162f784466a5a63016a89e1a9f.obama_2008_ilmg122.jpg
[/quote]

IS THIS WHO YOU WANT LEADING THE COUNTRY, AMERICA?! WIFE SWAPPERS!!?
 
McCain having "yielded to the very Swift Boat politics he once so deplored" is a great, great point and I'm really amazed that more people aren't hating him for it. His campaign has gotten really, really ugly lately.
 
I think Biden was the best possible veep choice given the field of likely candidates. The thing that bothers me most is his past (hopefully) and much-publicized predilection for plagiarism. If you've read about it (Slate has two very good summations), it's pretty discouraging. But that was 20 years ago, and many other aspects of his character outweigh those transgressions to me. David Brooks had a great op-ed in the NY Times this week highlighting why Biden is the man.

First and foremost, Biden has proven himself capable of intelligent and nuanced (if lengthy) discourse on all manner of issues. He's a sharp guy, even if he runs off at the mouth sometimes. One of Obama's greatest assets, on display in his books and his speeches, is his intelligent eloquence, and I think Biden will fit nicely with that, if anything strengthening it with a bit more pathos and outrage than Obama generally affords himself.

Biden also has something like the second or third lowest net worth in the Senate, estimated at $150k - $200k. In Washington terms (Hell, maybe even for CAGs), that's pocket change. He takes mass transit every day, and hasn't strayed far at all from the working-class roots from which he hails, despite several decades worth of opportunities to line his pockets. This puts him in prime position to highlight the hypocrisy of John "Ask my staff how many houses I own" McCain.

He also has an extremely compelling personal backstory, what with his wife and infant son dying in a car accident shortly after he was first elected to Congress at age 29. I think when you go through something like that, you can't help but be transformed by it, and you have a deeper understanding of what's important in life than someone who hasn't (although John Edwards didn't seem to learn much from losing a son and having a wife with terminal cancer). I'm not saying McCain, whoever he choses for VP, or Obama don't have that same wealth of personal experience to draw from, but if you ever hear Biden talk about that part of his life (and he only does so sparingly), you definitely get a feel for the emotional wisdom he gained from it.

On top of everything, he's got a ton of foreign policy bonafides, builds a bridge to the Catholics, and has been in Washington long enough to know where the bodies are buried. As long as he can keep his mouth in check, he's a great pick.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='ananag112']If you have a Xbox 360, change your gamer pic to Obama's gamer pic (found under Rock the Vote).[/quote]

I love the way XboxLive is pushing for new voters!
 
[quote name='moonknight25']I love the way XboxLive is pushing for new voters![/quote]

Now if only we could vote through Xboxlive. Then I wouldn't have to get up off my ass.:cool:
 
[quote name='ananag112']If you have a Xbox 360, change your gamer pic to Obama's gamer pic (found under Rock the Vote).[/QUOTE]

Do you really want to represent yourself by a political endorsement? That is essentially what you are doing by making your avatar an Obama one. I am a McCain supporter but I don't want to define myself by a politician, so I didn't change my avatar. I did download all of them though just for collectability's sake :)

I guess its similar to people who put political bumper stickers on their cars, I never do that either as I feel it cheapens my self in some ways.
 
It's not defining yourself.

It's helping promote the candidate you support. I don't think it cheapens a person at all. I think it shows they actually at least give a shit about politics, something that sadly the vast majority of people do not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top