Between Obama, Biden, McCain, and Palin, who would you want as President?

[grundle]

Moderators, if you think this thread is one too many, please merge it with one of the others instead of erasing it. I don't care about the thread - I just want the poll.

For this poll, I vote for Palin.

[wendersfan]

I don't really want any of them, but the only one I really, <i>really</i> wouldn't want is Palin.

[al_bundy]

too bad there is 0% chance of an Obama/Palin ticket

[MartinBlank]

I don't really want any of them, but the only one I really, <i>really</i> wouldn't want is Palin.

Thank you for adding so much to the conversation :wave:

I'm and individualist, not a collectivist...so, I'm gonna have to go with Palin on this one. That and she likes her fire arms. Oh yeah...and she's smokin' hot :)

[Venusian]

The thing I like about Palin is the thing I liked about Obama - she's new so I don't know much about her so there is a lot of potential. The more I find out about her, the worse she becomes...like Obama :(

I don't know who to pick out of this list

[awil1026]

I pick Obama, but in an ideal society, none of these individuals would have a chance in hell of becoming president.

[creekdipper]

C'mon, Biden supporters! Where are you????

After all, he could very well end up "a heartbeat away from the Presidency"!

And he's so articulate...and clean!

[kvrdave]

Ewwww, those are the choices.

[creekdipper]

Ewwww, those are the choices.

Well, there's always Ralph & Ron.

[wendersfan]

Well, there's always Ralph & Ron.And Cynthia McKinney!

:banana::banana::banana:

[MartinBlank]

C'mon, Biden supporters! Where are you????

After all, he could very well end up "a heartbeat away from the Presidency"!

And he's so articulate...and clean!

I'm sure this poll will have to be updated in the next few weeks when Biden's thrown under the bus and Hilldog is added to the ticket.

[crazyronin]

If there was some way of perpetuating eternal gridlock on American politics, I would vote for it.

Its just those pesky midterm elections could be such a wild card allowing one party control over both branches.

[Bandoman]

If there was some way of perpetuating eternal gridlock on American politics, I would vote for it.


You just made Jimmy sad.

http://images.suite101.com/373859_com_stockdale.jpg


I voted Obama.


Edit: [grammar nazi] Shouldn't the first word of the thread title be "Among"? [/gn]

[Doughboy]

Out of those four, easily McCain.


I wanted Romney to get the nomination(although he would've been creamed in the general election by Obama). But his performance at Saddleback and selecting Palin as his running mate makes me feel a lot better about McCain.

[dick_grayson]

when do the debates start?

[Thor Simpson]

Looks like the ABB of 2008 is Anyone But Biden. :(

[Jason]

I'm sure this poll will have to be updated in the next few weeks when Biden's thrown under the bus and Hilldog is added to the ticket.

Another mindless talk radio talking point from the non-collectivist. -ohbfrank-

[Nazgul]

Looks like the ABB of 2008 is Anyone But Biden. :(

There are only a few things I know about Biden. He's a plagerizer, he's smarter than most people (and he's not afraid to say so) and he thinks Apu runs all 7-11's.

I think that's enough to put him at the bottom of this list.

While I hope McCain will do more with the Economy, I have to rank him above Obama, because I don't buy the "we'll change everything that is wrong with America', sounds like he's pandering to people who are in despair over the last 8 years. I just think it's mostly fluff.

My Rankings:

1. McCain
2. Obama
3. Palin
4. Biden

[classicman2]

Where is the 'none of the above' option?

[Thor Simpson]

It's too bad we can't rank like that in the poll.

I would say:

1. Palin
2. Obama
3. Biden
4. McCain

It's really unfortunate that McCain is heading the (R) ticket, and like someone else said, that Obama and Palin can't be on the same ticket. I would put Palin at the top, however.

[classicman2]

I don't really want any of them, but the only one I really, <i>really</i> wouldn't want is Palin.

I believe I had rather have Palin. IMO, potentially less dangerous than McCain.

[grundle]

I'm and individualist, not a collectivist...so, I'm gonna have to go with Palin on this one. That and she likes her fire arms.


Yes, and yes.


http://www.sightm1911.com/Care/Gun_Quotes.htm

"The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing."

-- Adolf Hitler, dinner talk on April 11, 1942, quoted in Hitler's Table Talk 1941-44: His Private Conversations, Second Edition (1973), Pg. 425-426. Translated by Norman Cameron and R. H. Stevens.

[grundle]

Where is the 'none of the above' option?

I prefer Ron Paul over any of them. But I wanted to see what people thought, from among these 4 choices.

[hahn]

6 people actually picked Palin as their top choice for president. This is a woman we know almost nothing about and have only heard of in the last week. And 6 of you want to put her in one of the most powerful positions in the world. To head foreign policy at a time when good foreign policy is more critical than ever for the future of this country.
:rolleyes:

[movielib]

I prefer Ron Paul over any of them. But I wanted to see what people thought, from among these 4 choices.
But libertarians are big on "None of the Above." I want my "None of the Avove."

I could support Palin's Environment and Energy policy and that's about it.

[kvrdave]

when do the debates start?

Post 2, any thread.

[Thor Simpson]

6 people actually picked Palin as their top choice for president. This is a woman we know almost nothing about and have only heard of in the last week. And 6 of you want to put her in one of the most powerful positions in the world. To head foreign policy at a time when good foreign policy is more critical than ever for the future of this country.
:rolleyes:

You've just convinced me to move Obama down to my #3 pick. :(

[dick_grayson]

Post 2, any thread.

zing! looks like sept 26th

[Chrisedge]

I wish this poll was public.

[sracer]

Palin's pronunciation of Iraq as EYE-rack alone should disqualify her from public office.

[RoboDad]

I wish this poll was public.

Well, many people don't seem to be afraid to discuss their votes, so we're getting a pretty good idea anyway, even though I agree that it would have been nice to have it public.

For me, it was a pretty easy choice:

1. Palin
2. McCain
3. Obama

...

99,999. Biden

[classicman2]

I believe energy will be the biggest problem facing this country.

I agree with movielib on Palin as it pertains to energy. Clearly she is the 'best' in that area.

[Dr Mabuse]

Note the McCain/Palin ticket as a whole is tied with the Messiah/Liar ticket in votes 23 to 23.

The polls may be on to something.

[kvrdave]

I believe energy will be the biggest problem facing this country.

I agree with movielib on Palin as it pertains to energy. Clearly she is the 'best' in that area.


Agree. The Republicans will control the oil market (as they do, and we all know it), and gas will hit $5 a gallon in October, which will make everyone want to drill except Obama/Biden.

[Giantrobo]

Personal Choice on a "I just like them" level....Palin

Realistic, good for the country vote...Probably none of the above. :lol:

[General Zod]

I knew the results of this poll before I took it. Obama with about half (nobody gives a crap about Biden) and the other half split between Palin and McCain with Palin leading because she's be much nicer to see on TV than crabby McCain. Ok.. so I didn't have it 100% right (McCain is slightly leading) but I have faith Palin will take the lead ;)

Probably didn't help I voted for McCain..

[Thor Simpson]

Palin's pronunciation of Iraq as EYE-rack alone should disqualify her from public office.

I still say it that way. I know it's not the "correct" way, but I think it's widely accepted.

[creekdipper]

6 people actually picked Palin as their top choice for president. This is a woman we know almost nothing about and have only heard of in the last week. And 6 of you want to put her in one of the most powerful positions in the world. To head foreign policy at a time when good foreign policy is more critical than ever for the future of this country.
:rolleyes:

I'm assuming that you hated "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington".

[creekdipper]

Can we bring back the days when the second-place finisher got to be Vice-President?

Would make for some great Cabinet meetings.

[Giantrobo]

6 people actually picked Palin as their top choice for president. This is a woman we know almost nothing about and have only heard of in the last week. And 6 of you want to put her in one of the most powerful positions in the world. To head foreign policy at a time when good foreign policy is more critical than ever for the future of this country.
:rolleyes:

Shut up. :lol:

[classicman2]

6 people actually picked Palin as their top choice for president. This is a woman we know almost nothing about and have only heard of in the last week. And 6 of you want to put her in one of the most powerful positions in the world. To head foreign policy at a time when good foreign policy is more critical than ever for the future of this country.
:rolleyes:

The last president to make his own foreign policy was Richard Nixon. I know he made his own, because he said he did; and, more importantly, Henry Kissinger said he did; and, if Henry can possibly take credit - he'll do so. ;)

[Brack]

I love that Palin gets so much support, and probably from people who first heard of her a week ago. :lol:

[VinVega]

C'mon, Biden supporters! Where are you????
:wave:

He's the first candidate I ever sent money to. The bastard dropped out of the race a week after he got my money too. :lol:

[auto]

I don't really post in this forum but are people being serious when they say they would prefer Palin as President. I mean, c'mon....seriously?

[Duran]

I don't agree with the majority of their policies, but of the four, I picked Obama. I, too, prefer Palin's energy and environmental policies, but I think they're driven by her Alaskan perspective rather than any philosophical agreement with my views.

[Pharoh]

I don't really post in this forum but are people being serious when they say they would prefer Palin as President. I mean, c'mon....seriously?

Over Mr. Obama? Yes. I would vote for you before Mr. Obama.



As an aside, I didn't vote in the poll.

[classicman2]

I don't really post in this forum but are people being serious when they say they would prefer Palin as President. I mean, c'mon....seriously?


I said I prefer her stance on energy over the other 3.

[dork]

I don't like any of the choices. My dream candidate would combine the best features of each: McCain's charisma, Biden's wisdom, Palin's foreign policy experience, and Obama's courage.

[Thor Simpson]

I don't like any of the choices. My dream candidate would combine the best features of each: McCain's charisma, Biden's wisdom, Palin's foreign policy experience, and Obama's courage.

Don't you mean McCain's abs, Obama's ears, Palin's hips and Biden's tits?

[dork]

Don't you mean McCain's abs, Obama's ears, Palin's hips and Biden's tits?
That's my dream woman(?). -other-

[sracer]

I still say it that way. I know it's not the "correct" way, but I think it's widely accepted.
Please don't tell me that you pronounce it eye-TAL-yun. ;)

I get that out here every once in a while.

[awil1026]

I prefer Ron Paul over any of them.

:thumbsup:

[cactusoly]

It scares the shit out of me that it is very likely Palin will be president in a couple years

[creekdipper]

This thread is getting WAY too serious.

Edit: Sorry...I posted this after reading the "dream component candidate" posts, not after the last three.

[Rockmjd23]

It scares the shit out of me that it is very likely Palin will be presitent in a couple years
Very likely? :lol: It's not even very likely that she becomes VP.

[hahn]

The last president to make his own foreign policy was Richard Nixon. I know he made his own, because he said he did; and, more importantly, Henry Kissinger said he did; and, if Henry can possibly take credit - he'll do so. ;)So you're saying the president doesn't influence or have input on foreign policy?

[Thor Simpson]

Please don't tell me that you pronounce it eye-TAL-yun. ;)

Nope. Been to Italy too many times and eat Italian often. When Iraqi food catches on like pasta, maybe I'll start pronouncing it properly but you have to earn that.

[hahn]

Personal Choice on a "I just like them" level....PalinThis is the main problem that I see with American politics. Most people think it's a joke and so they just pick the person they "like". Not saying you personally Giantrobo as obviously, you're far from the only person who doesn't take it seriously. Witness all the photochopped bikini images of Palin posted. And ironically most of them by conservatives who are in the same breath declaring with 100% confidence that she is a legitimate choice.

[Thor Simpson]

This is the main problem that I see with American politics. Most people think it's a joke and so they just pick the person they "like".

On DVD Talk polls? Sure. At "the polls?" Get real.

[B5Erik]

Where is the 'none of the above' option?
I'm with you on that one.

But I haven't really been happy with a Presidential candidate from either major party since 1992, and that time my guy lost.

[RayChuang]

In order of preference:

1) Palin
2) McCain
3) Biden
4) Obama

Why Senator Obama last? Because his legislative record as both Illinois State Senator and US Senator are very unimpressive. :down:

[Giantrobo]

This is the main problem that I see with American politics. Most people think it's a joke and so they just pick the person they "like". Not saying you personally Giantrobo as obviously, you're far from the only person who doesn't take it seriously.

I get that American Politics are FUBAR'd, but come on man. It's a corny dvdtalk Poll and it has no influence on what's going on in the real world. Maybe if I had chose Obama right off the bat you would've been satisfied that I was taking this poll seriously.....

Witness all the photochopped bikini images of Palin posted. And <b>ironically most of them by conservatives</b> who are in the same breath declaring with 100% confidence that she is a legitimate choice.

<i>This</i> is another problem with American Politics. Blankets statements like this. How do you know that they're mostly created by Conservatives?

[Shannon Nutt]

Why Senator Obama last? Because his legislative record as both Illinois State Senator and US Senator are very unimpressive. :down:

I challenge you to find someone who has been in the Senate as short the amount of time as Obama who has a record as impressive as his.

He's sponsored or co-sponsored close to 600 bills, at least 15 of which became LAW, and personally introduced ammendements to at least 50 bills, 16 of which were adopted by the Senate.

Among the bills that became laws include relief to the Congo, improving mine safety, increasing funds for breast cancer awareness and care, reducing infant mortality, and more transperancy for those receiving federal funds.

In the State Senate, he sponsored over 800 bills. He helped pass legislation on campaign finance reform, tax credits for the working poor, and a law against racial profiling by law enforcement.

Now, if you'll kindly list Ms. Palin's legislative accomplishments, we can have an INFORMED debate about qualifications.

[kvrdave]

This is the main problem that I see with American politics. Most people think it's a joke and so they just pick the person they "like". Not saying you personally Giantrobo as obviously, you're far from the only person who doesn't take it seriously. Witness all the photochopped bikini images of Palin posted. And ironically most of them by conservatives who are in the same breath declaring with 100% confidence that she is a legitimate choice.

I hear this and I think, "What makes you think it is different anywhere else?"

[GatorDeb]

Palin's pronunciation of Iraq as EYE-rack alone should disqualify her from public office.

Thats's how I say it :sad:

[naitram]

Ron Paul

[SkullOrchard]

Thats's how I say it :sad:Palin, you, me, and about 99% of the people pronounce it that way.

[Numanoid]

Palin - 19 votes. I weep for this country. :lol:

[Dr Mabuse]

Note the McCain/Palin ticket as a whole is tied with the Messiah/Liar ticket in votes 23 to 23.

The polls may be on to something.

I'll be damned if the Messiah/Liar ticket isn't still tied with J. Howard Marshall/Anna Nicole ticket 43 to 43.

[dork]

I challenge you to find someone who has been in the Senate as short the amount of time as Obama who has a record as impressive as his.

Why would you issue a dare like this without checking to see if the facts are on your side? :confused:

Legislative histories are easy to find. Here is Obama's (http://www.govtrack.us/congress/person.xpd?id=400629):


Barack Obama has sponsored 136 bills since Jan 4, 2005, of which 122 haven't made it out of committee and 2 were successfully enacted. Obama has co-sponsored 653 bills during the same time period.

Looking at the stats of successfully enacted bills, we see two new 2005 senators above Obama (Thune -- 4/53 enacted; Salazar -- 3/108 enacted) and two below. (There were three others: Burr, DeMint, and Vitter were all previously representatives and it didn't seem worth the effort to try to disentangle their House records from their Senatorial ones. The point is, when you say, "find someone who has been in the Senate as short the amount of time as Obama" you are talking about a pool of only eight people.)

We've already discussed Obama's unique flair for co-sponsorship, which in any case has all the prestige and integrity of an associate producer credit.

[classicman2]

Shannon Nutt,

You can't win 'em all. :)

[classicman2]

Y'all know about co-sponsoring bills, don't you.

'Mr. President, I ask that my name be added to S1234 as a co-sponsor.' The president says 'without objection.....' No one ever objects.

[kvrdave]

Palin - 19 votes. I weep for this country. :lol:

I don't think it is really that surprising. I don't want her for president, but I think there is something to be said for, "We know enough about you three guys to know that we'd rather have someone else. We don't know much about you, so let's go that way."

At least I see it more as an indictment against the other ones in the race than the fact that they actually want Palin to be president.

[al_bundy]

I challenge you to find someone who has been in the Senate as short the amount of time as Obama who has a record as impressive as his.

He's sponsored or co-sponsored close to 600 bills, at least 15 of which became LAW, and personally introduced ammendements to at least 50 bills, 16 of which were adopted by the Senate.

Among the bills that became laws include relief to the Congo, improving mine safety, increasing funds for breast cancer awareness and care, reducing infant mortality, and more transperancy for those receiving federal funds.

In the State Senate, he sponsored over 800 bills. He helped pass legislation on campaign finance reform, tax credits for the working poor, and a law against racial profiling by law enforcement.

Now, if you'll kindly list Ms. Palin's legislative accomplishments, we can have an INFORMED debate about qualifications.

a lot of bills are introduced every year

only 1% or so are ever passed into law

[Groucho]

I don't think it is really that surprising. I don't want her for president, but I think there is something to be said for, "We know enough about you three guys to know that we'd rather have someone else. We don't know much about you, so let's go that way."Yeah those numbers will change if and when she finally agrees to sit down to an interview.

[JasonF]

Y'all know about co-sponsoring bills, don't you.

'Mr. President, I ask that my name be added to S1234 as a co-sponsor.' The president says 'without objection.....' No one ever objects.

There's co-sponsorship and there's co-sponsorship. Some of Senator Obama's co-sponsorships are of the former variety. Some are like the Coburn-Obama Funding Transparency Act or the Lugar-Obama Loose Nukes Act. I do agree that straight numbers don't tell the whole story, but you can't write off every co-sponsored bill as meaningless either.

[JasonF]

Yeah those numbers will change if and when she finally agrees to sit down to an interview.

Apparently that's not going to happen. After all, she might make a mistake.

2AV_54517R8

[hahn]

I get that American Politics are FUBAR'd, but come on man. It's a corny dvdtalk Poll and it has no influence on what's going on in the real world. Maybe if I had chose Obama right off the bat you would've been satisfied that I was taking this poll seriously.....



<i>This</i> is another problem with American Politics. Blankets statements like this. How do you know that they're mostly created by Conservatives?I'm not talking about the creation of the photos. I'm talking about posting them. Go back into the Palin thread and check it out. This is how seriously the conservatives on this board take their VP candidate.

[creekdipper]

I challenge you to find someone who has been in the Senate as short the amount of time as Obama who has a record as impressive as his.

He's sponsored or co-sponsored close to 600 bills, at least 15 of which became LAW, and personally introduced ammendements to at least 50 bills, 16 of which were adopted by the Senate.

Among the bills that became laws include relief to the Congo, improving mine safety, increasing funds for breast cancer awareness and care, reducing infant mortality, and more transperancy for those receiving federal funds.

In the State Senate, he sponsored over 800 bills. He helped pass legislation on campaign finance reform, tax credits for the working poor, and a law against racial profiling by law enforcement.

Now, if you'll kindly list Ms. Palin's legislative accomplishments, we can have an INFORMED debate about qualifications.

In case you've forgotten, the Presidency is an EXECUTIVE office, not a LEGISLATIVE one.

Reducing infant mortality? You've got to be kidding. Are you talking about the legislation he repeatedly sponsored to prevent the "Born Alive" provisions to protect babies who survive abortions?

That's a funny way of "reducing" infant mortality...unless you think that killing them right off the bat reduces the mortality later.

Lest you think this is a 'smear', go to Obama's website in which the various "smears" are discussed. Nowhere does it mention his well-documented record in this matter...thus lending credence that the allegations are, indeed, entirely true.

[creekdipper]

I'm getting awfully tired of people citing years in office in a legislative branch as a definite qualification for office. The last time I looked, Congress had lower approval ratings than the President. How does serving in a reviled branch of the government prove your worth?

Let's put it this way: A coach has been around for 30 years. During that time, he/she has been head coach of 5 different teams, none of which has a winning record. In fact, his/her last coaching stint was with a team whose performance was abysmal. Or a CEO has been chairman of the board for 5 different companies...all which filed for bankruptcy.

Is this the coach/CEO you want to rebuild the program/company?

But, of course...he/she has lots of "experience".

At losing.

[Brack]

In case you've forgotten, the Presidency is an EXECUTIVE office, not a LEGISLATIVE one.

Reducing infant mortality? You've got to be kidding. Are you talking about the legislation he repeatedly sponsored to prevent the "Born Alive" provisions to protect babies who survive abortions?

That's a funny way of "reducing" infant mortality...unless you think that killing them right off the bat reduces the mortality later.

Lest you think this is a 'smear', go to Obama's website in which the various "smears" are discussed. Nowhere does it mention his well-documented record in this matter...thus lending credence that the allegations are, indeed, entirely true.

oh really?

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/08/19/fact_check_born_alive_1.php

What Senator Obama’s attackers don’t tell you is that existing Illinois law already requires doctors to provide medical care in the very rare case that babies are born alive during abortions.

[grundle]

It scares the shit out of me that it is very likely Palin will be president in a couple years

Who would you rather have in charge of running the military, a guy who's afraid of guns and bowls a 37, or a woman who shoots her own food?

[Giantrobo]

I'm not talking about the creation of the photos. I'm talking about posting them. Go back into the Palin thread and check it out. This is how seriously the conservatives on this board take their VP candidate.


Ok, I see what you meant. I thought you meant that the pics were "Created" by Conservatives.

[mgbfan]

1) Obama
2) McCain
3) Biden
4) Ron Paul
5) Ross Perot
6) El Scorcho
7) Ronald McDonald
1.7 million) Palin

Now, if the question was who I had to be stuck on a desert island with, the answer would be different. Assuming she could rain in the "Praise Jesuses."

[wm lopez]

That Biden got more than one vote surprises me.

[creekdipper]

oh really?

http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/08/19/fact_check_born_alive_1.php

Yes, really.

The section titled "Fight the Smears" does not provide the propoganda cited above.
It appears in the "Factcheck Obama" section, which I did not peruse.

If you read the entire convoluted explanation in the link you provided, you saw that Obama voted "present" (do we detect a pattern here) on most of the votes on the legislation although he stated that he opposed it on the grounds that it did not include a "guarantee" (?) that the legislation would not be used to undermine Roe. Saying That other "pro-choice" senators who happen to be Republicans were among the 40% who voted "No" with him is simply an attempt to provide him with the political cover he craves so badly; stating that he "predicted" that the legislation would be overturned even if enacted is another convenient way of avoiding blame (I knew it wouldn't pass anyway, so I voted no. Or present. Whatever).

It appears that there were several attempts made to pass the bill during Obama's tenure & that he opposed every attempt, although he said that had he been in the U.S. Senate at the time, he would have voted "Yes" on the federal legislation since it included a provision that the act would not be used in future attempts to undermine Roe v. Wade. In other words, Obama would rather see viable babies die rather than pass a bill that MIGHT be cited in the future as a precedent for other legislation. Does he do the take the same approach to all legislation (since practically any new legislation MIGHT establish precedents for the future)?

To say that Illinois law already requires doctors to "provide medical assistance" does not explain why Obama felt the need to launch into a discussion of fetal viability, the status of personhood, etc. The law says that the abortionists are required, if they determine that the fetus is viable, to use that method of abortion most likely to preserve the life of the fetus being aborted (?) and that IF THE CHILD SURVIVES THE ABORTION, then a separate doctor who provide medical assistance to preserve the life of the child.. It's like the old "health of the mother" loophole that allows the abortionist to decide viablility, etc. I mean, it's not like the abortionist has a vested interest in encouraging the demise of the fetus, is it? (The legislation would have required another physician to render the care, thus removing the abortionist from the life-or-death decision in the case of a live birth).

If the issue is so clearcut to him, why bother? And why rationalize his vote by saying that he "would" have voted for it except he feared that it might lead to ramifications regarding limiting Roe (saying, in effect, that the legislation would outlaw all abortions if the fetus were to be regarded as a person). That sounds as is Obama cannot bring himself to consider any specific issue without considering the "slippery slope" ramifications (which I thought was anathema to Democrats who mock such arguments when made by opponents). At any rate, even on legislation that NARAL itself did not oppose, Obama never voted "yes"...only "no" or "present".

In a nutshell, Obama is literally willing to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater'. Unwilling to face an issue squarely and reach a decision (the purpose for which he was elected), he takes the coward's way out by voting "present" and claiming that such matters are "above (his) pay grade". That's your guy, all right...a shining example of grace under pressure...or should that be "collapse under pressure"?

[CertifiedTHX]

(I once heard that the proper pronunciation is "e-rock," with the "e" spoken like the "i" in Italy. That was at the time of the Gulf War. Likewise, Iran is "e-ron.")

However high on the pedestal the Republican leadership is putting Palin-- practically declaring that she was qualified for VP after one day on the job as Governor-- I doubt she is anywhere near that ready truly.

I have doubts about Obama as well. I like him. I like how he inspires. But he seems to be running on little more than inspiring people. I don't think he'd even be where he is right now had he not made the keynote address at the Democratic Convention in 2004. He hadn't even been elected to the U.S. Senate, and the buzz was already starting for the presidency. Because of a speech. That said, while he likely will not be a grand savior who will bring peace to all nations, he might stand a good chance of getting the ball rolling.

Between Biden and McCain, I think the only difference on which to base a preference is who better represents your values. Experience is the issue this election, and both bring years of it to the table. I'm sure both would be effective in the presidency.

--THX

[wendersfan]

Who would you rather have in charge of running the military, a guy who's afraid of guns and bowls a 37, or a woman who shoots her own food?I'd want the person who has the best judgment.

[Suprmallet]

I'm getting awfully tired of people citing years in office in a legislative branch as a definite qualification for office. The last time I looked, Congress had lower approval ratings than the President. How does serving in a reviled branch of the government prove your worth?

Do not take this the wrong way, because I am not saying that Obama would lead this country the way that Abraham Lincoln did, but Lincoln was a member of the House of Representatives prior to becoming president. Prior to that he was an Illinois state legislator. Never had an executive position before becoming President. James Madison, the father of the Consitution, was also a congressman. So, while legislative experience may not be a definitive qualification for office, it certainly isn't a bad qualification, as you're suggesting.

Then again, Nixon was also a member of Congress, so it's not like it's all roses, either.

[Paul_SD]

That Biden got more than one vote surprises me.
I've watched Biden in Senate hearings, I've seen the follow-up questions he asks, and I've seen him address foreign policy in discussions in sparsley populated meeting rooms. He impresses me in his awareness of the players and knowledge of what THEIR interests are (not just ours) and he impresses me for the same reason a lot of people deride him - he speaks candidly and often comes across as gauche. He is going to make one or two sizable gaffes in this campaign (maybe more) and I don't care because the guy is genuine.
Which is completely unlike ex-war hero McCain, who just sold the last shred of his Maverick soul to the devil for the big win. Everything this guy professed to rail against in his party is now part of the platform he is representing. He is the eptiome of an empty hollow man.
And that's why he's gonna be sworn in in Jan 09.
But that's ok, because together with his running mate who is already an adept liar as well as a creationist, would be book banning, pork lobbying, hockey mom values spewing hyena who couldn't wait to bail out on the day to day nurturing of her 'special needs' infant to hitch a ride on the rocket bound for fame and glory, big oil marinated good ole gal, ....they are the kinds of leaders this country absolutely DESERVES.

[sracer]

I'm getting awfully tired of people citing years in office in a legislative branch as a definite qualification for office. The last time I looked, Congress had lower approval ratings than the President. How does serving in a reviled branch of the government prove your worth?

Let's put it this way: A coach has been around for 30 years. During that time, he/she has been head coach of 5 different teams, none of which has a winning record. In fact, his/her last coaching stint was with a team whose performance was abysmal. Or a CEO has been chairman of the board for 5 different companies...all which filed for bankruptcy.

Is this the coach/CEO you want to rebuild the program/company?

But, of course...he/she has lots of "experience".

At losing.
You're only saying that because Palin is a weak choice for VP.

Interesting that the worthlessness of legislative experience wasn't raised during the primaries and that none of the governors who ran, won.

It is only now, out of a sense of desperation in puffing up a weak choice that executive vs legislative experience issue is coming up. Republicans now totally dismiss legislative experience asking the question, "how many executive decisions has Obama made?" Answer: The same number as John McCain.

[classicman2]

There's co-sponsorship and there's co-sponsorship. Some of Senator Obama's co-sponsorships are of the former variety. Some are like the Coburn-Obama Funding Transparency Act or the Lugar-Obama Loose Nukes Act. I do agree that straight numbers don't tell the whole story, but you can't write off every co-sponsored bill as meaningless either.


Both of those were earth-shaking bills. ;)

[classicman2]

I'd want the person who has the best judgment.

I'll admit - I would prefer a man/woman with military experience.

I also want that person to have good judgment.

I still believe the idea that a person who has seen the not-so-pleasantness of war (participated in) generally is less likely to commit our military unless it is an absolute necessity.

[Brack]

Yes, really.

The section titled "Fight the Smears" does not provide the propoganda cited above.
It appears in the "Factcheck Obama" section, which I did not peruse.

Then that's your own ineptitude. You can't say it's not there just because you couldn't find it.

The law says that the abortionists are required, if they determine that the fetus is viable, to use that method of abortion most likely to preserve the life of the fetus being aborted (?) and that IF THE CHILD SURVIVES THE ABORTION, then a separate doctor who provide medical assistance to preserve the life of the child.. It's like the old "health of the mother" loophole that allows the abortionist to decide viablility, etc. I mean, it's not like the abortionist has a vested interest in encouraging the demise of the fetus, is it? (The legislation would have required another physician to render the care, thus removing the abortionist from the life-or-death decision in the case of a live birth).

If the issue is so clearcut to him, why bother? And why rationalize his vote by saying that he "would" have voted for it except he feared that it might lead to ramifications regarding limiting Roe (saying, in effect, that the legislation would outlaw all abortions if the fetus were to be regarded as a person). That sounds as is Obama cannot bring himself to consider any specific issue without considering the "slippery slope" ramifications (which I thought was anathema to Democrats who mock such arguments when made by opponents). At any rate, even on legislation that NARAL itself did not oppose, Obama never voted "yes"...only "no" or "present".

In a nutshell, Obama is literally willing to 'throw the baby out with the bathwater'. Unwilling to face an issue squarely and reach a decision (the purpose for which he was elected), he takes the coward's way out by voting "present" and claiming that such matters are "above (his) pay grade". That's your guy, all right...a shining example of grace under pressure...or should that be "collapse under pressure"?

Because he's a lawyer, and must take into account all the things that go into a law. The bottom line is that the law would've been redundant, and he felt the need to explain his case fully, as to not be taken the wrong way (like what you're doing right now). You don't just make something a law just because it sounds good.

[Thor Simpson]

Both of those were earth-shaking bills. ;)

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ouZTIqcvb30&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ouZTIqcvb30&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x2b405b&color2=0x6b8ab6" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[CertifiedTHX]

I've watched Biden in Senate hearings, I've seen the follow-up questions he asks, and I've seen him address foreign policy in discussions in sparsley populated meeting rooms. He impresses me in his awareness of the players and knowledge of what THEIR interests are (not just ours) and he impresses me for the same reason a lot of people deride him - he speaks candidly and often comes across as gauche. He is going to make one or two sizable gaffes in this campaign (maybe more) and I don't care because the guy is genuine.

Agreed.

His impact on the campaign was negligible to the point of nonexistent, but that was because he didn't have the star power of Obama and Clinton. I thought he (and Dodd) made the most compelling arguments, but I knew he was going to get nowhere close. Neither Obama nor Clinton particularly impressed me: He was always citing how he had voted against the war from the beginning, and she was always dodging the questions. But the polling showed consistently that one or the other won the debates. People tend to vote for celebrity over intelligence and wisdom. Which might explain how Bush got the nomination over McCain in 2000.

--THX

[classicman2]

Obama will do absolutely nothing to endanger his 100% NRAL rating.

[creekdipper]

Then that's your own ineptitude. You can't say it's not there just because you couldn't find it.



??????

I said it wasn't on the website where the "smears" were discussed...and it isn't. How is that ineptitude?

Oh, you mean that I didn't spend hours reading the entire website & all its related links.

Then I plead guilty to "ineptitude".

Whatever.

I would have thought that the "Factcheck" section would be reserved to discuss the perceived discrepancies that Obama alleges to find in his opponents' records, while the "Smears" section would be reserved for allegations made by his opponents about Obama himself.

[creekdipper]

You're only saying that because Palin is a weak choice for VP.

Interesting that the worthlessness of legislative experience wasn't raised during the primaries and that none of the governors who ran, won.

It is only now, out of a sense of desperation in puffing up a weak choice that executive vs legislative experience issue is coming up. Republicans now totally dismiss legislative experience asking the question, "how many executive decisions has Obama made?" Answer: The same number as John McCain.


No one said that legislative experience is worthless...just that it's different from executive experience.

The thought I expressed was that it's odd that people have so little respect for Congress yet are supporting members of Congress for President. Just seems a little oxymoronic to me.

If Palin is a 'weak' choice for VP, what makes Obama such a 'strong' choice for the main job? Not only does he have no executive experience, he has very little legislative experience.

Unless you think your local state representative is prepared to be PoUS.

[gmanca]

If you want to compare experience and time served, he's been a legislator for 9+ years, she's been an executive for 7+ years. Her time was exclusively local, the majority of his local.

He may be the third weakest in experience of the four, but he's had to face the National press and American public on many occasions, describing policy, taking "gotcha" questions, and appearing in about 12 National debates. She's had appearances on Glenn Beck and Kudlow and Company as well as a Female Governors forum.

Obama has his VP and Cabinet to lean on in case of a National Emergency; there are capable hands to lead the nation without much worry of experience. If McCain were to pass of natural causes, she doesn't get a VP immediately as both Houses of Congress vote by majority on a nominee. During 9/11, VP Cheney was the person with authority to call on fighters to take down any other hijacked aircraft. Are you going to honestly tell me you want Gov. Palin to be in that role, that sudden?

[The Bus]

Under Delaware State Law (§§ 4409-4410) I must make "every reasonable effort" to vote for "Joe Biden" in any "national" poll whenever possible.

[X]

Obama has his VP and Cabinet to lean on in case of a National Emergency; there are capable hands to lead the nation without much worry of experience. If McCain were to pass of natural causes, she doesn't get a VP immediately as both Houses of Congress vote by majority on a nominee.rotfl

So Obama isn't qualified but Biden and his new cabinet will fill in the gaps from day one, but Palin wouldn't have any support from the VP staff and the advisors and cabinet that McCain had had in place for some time? Does the cabinet immediately dissolve and the advisors flee when the president dies?

Boggles the mind.

[scc15]

rotfl

So Obama isn't qualified but Biden and his new cabinet will fill in the gaps from day one, but Palin wouldn't have any support from the VP staff and the advisors and cabinet that McCain had had in place for some time? Does the cabinet immediately dissolve and the advisors flee when the president dies?

Boggles the mind.

The only problem is that in McCain's case said staff would be filled by the same people who got us into this mess (or at least like-minded people). "This mess" being the last 8 years.

[X]

The only problem is that in McCain's case said staff would be filled by the same people who got us into this mess (or at least like-minded people).Now that's a reasonable argument that can be made. But the one I quoted wasn't.

[Brack]

??????

I said it wasn't on the website where the "smears" were discussed...and it isn't. How is that ineptitude?

Oh, you mean that I didn't spend hours reading the entire website & all its related links.

Then I plead guilty to "ineptitude".

Whatever.

I would have thought that the "Factcheck" section would be reserved to discuss the perceived discrepancies that Obama alleges to find in his opponents' records, while the "Smears" section would be reserved for allegations made by his opponents about Obama himself.

The "Know the Facts" section is where real groups or publications are misleading/lying, while the "Fight the Smears" section is related more to tv attack ads or silly rumors.

[slop101]

Palin, you, me, and about 99% of the people pronounce it that way.And you're all wrong.

It's pronounced "e-rock".

[Brack]

^^^ Americans wrong? Never!

[Thor Simpson]

And you're all wrong.

It's pronounced "e-rock".

e-leetist. -rolleyes-

[movielib]

And you're all wrong.

It's pronounced "e-rock".
The preferred pronunciation is "i-'rock. (The "i" as in "hit" which is difficult to distinguish from "e-rock" because of the following "r.")

Likewise, that other country is "i-'ron."

I know because I had an aunt and uncle who lived in Iran for decades up until just before the Shah was ousted and they hated hearing the names of those countries mispronounced, especially as "eye-ran" and eye-rack."

[Thor Simpson]

How do you pronounce "Germany?"

Apparently, if you don't say "Deutschland" you're WRONG and IGNORANT.

I'll bet Obama knows how to say it.

[slop101]

The preferred pronunciation is "i-'rock. (The "i" as in "hit" which is difficult to distinguish from "e-rock" because of the following "r.")

Likewise, that other country is "i-'ron."

I know because I had an aunt and uncle who lived in Iran for decades up until just before the Shah was ousted and they hated hearing the names of those countries mispronounced, especially as "eye-ran" and eye-rack."Aw, how cute...

Not to play "internet one-upmanship", but I was born in Iran, so trust me when I tell you that the preferred pronunciation is "e-run" - same thing with "e-rock"

[Dr Mabuse]

You ever notice how anytime someone says "not to be X" or "not to do X" that is a sure sign they are about to do X?

X=play "internet one-upmanship" in this case.

[Thor Simpson]

Not to wet my pants over this issue but... aw, nuts. :(

[movielib]

Aw, how cute...

Not to play "internet one-upmanship", but I was born in Iran, so trust me when I tell you that the preferred pronunciation is "e-run" - same thing with "e-rock"
Well, as I said, the "i" or "e" are almost indistinguishable.

As for the "e-run" that's not what my aunt and uncle said. Perhaps they were wrong although I'm sure they heard it a million times. Perhaps just a different accent as we have in the U.S. and everywhere else?

[slop101]

It's definitely the accent, as I knew plenty of Americans living in Iran, before now and since, and very few of them pronounced it correctly. Which is weird, because "E-run" is very easy to pronounce in English.