I’ll say it again, Mick…
If people continue to underestimate Palin’s “Hometown” appeal…they will see her waving from that Capitol grandstand in January as McCain is sworn in and delivers his first Presidential Speech…
Mufasa
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
-Biden continued to spin the fiction of “deregulation!!” as the cause of the financial meltdown, and Palin should have been prepared to immediately attack it. She could have done it within the theme she and McCain are trying to push of “more oversight/cracking the whip on Wall Street”.
[/quote]
I’m really surprised she didn’t come out swinging on that one - the timing would have been near perfect, especially with the vote in the house today. Why the McCain/Palin camp isn’t jumping on this issue is a mystery to me.
[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Umm, I think Alexander Hamilton might have disagreed with that statement.
[/quote]
I actually laughed out loud at that.
[quote]doogie wrote:
She should have said at some point that she was a new comer, that she hadn’t been in Washington through the Nixon Admin, Ford Admin, Carter Admin, both Reagan Admins, Bush 1 Admin, both Clinton Admins, and Both Bush Admins. When you lay out just how long Biden has been there it sounds terrible.[/quote]
The problem with that is that it also reflects negatively on McCain’s longevity in Washington
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
One other point before I go to work!
I think Palin’s personna is real; and it comes off as such.
Her genius and political sauvvy comes in the fact that she knows how to use it and work it to her advantage.
In other words, her appeal isn’t that she supports middle America…its that she IS middle America in many peoples eyes.
(Again…I see it every day…)
Mufasa[/quote]
Her great value to McCain is if her appeal can pull some of the blue leaning or too close to call Midwest states over to the McCain column. She has zero chance of appealing to the solidly blue east coast and west coast states
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
I liken last nights debate to one that Ronald Reagan won in 1980 vs Jimmy Carter. At the end of the debate you knew that Carter was the Washington insider as a sitting President. But, Ronald Reagans charm with his down to earth resolutions to real problems shined through and you walked away not just agreeing with what he had to say, but liking him as well. [/quote]
Well, this ain’t 1980. A Republican spent the last 8 years in the White House, not a Democrat.
Reagan rode a wing of change phase. Palin actually condoned Bush’s policies. Her side is running on slogans. Democrats are running on the same concept as Reagan did.
Correct me if I got something wrong.
Biden looked like he was just waiting for Palin to screw up but it looks like she did her homework and did pretty well.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
I liken last nights debate to one that Ronald Reagan won in 1980 vs Jimmy Carter. At the end of the debate you knew that Carter was the Washington insider as a sitting President. But, Ronald Reagans charm with his down to earth resolutions to real problems shined through and you walked away not just agreeing with what he had to say, but liking him as well.
Well, this ain’t 1980. A Republican spent the last 8 years in the White House, not a Democrat.
Reagan rode a wing of change phase. Palin actually condoned Bush’s policies. Her side is running on slogans. Democrats are running on the same concept as Reagan did.
Correct me if I got something wrong.[/quote]
There is nothing new offered by the democrats. Soak the rich, soak business, give it to the “poor”.
People are sick and tired of being overtaxed and under represented in DC.
Tell me something new that Obama is offering.
You say that McCain/Palin are running on slogans?
Girl friend - tell me what is going to CHANGE under Obama. LMAO.
[quote]Mick28 wrote:
Sarah Palin in that same fashion walked away the winner last night. Not because she dazzled us with facts, but because she dazzled us with her folksy charm and down home approach to real world problems.
[/quote]
I agree that she could charm the antlers off a caribou, but what constitutes a “down home approach to real world problems”?
I thought they both did well, but they didn’t get into one issue on Iraq that, in my opinion, delineates the difference between the two tickets.
We are spending 10 billion a month acting as a security force for Iraq.
Why on earth would the Iraqi government ever want to stand on their own two feet and take over the fight? I’m not talking about the citizens, but the government. They have a no-cost security force (OUR troops) allowing them to grow and prosper. They have 400,000 troops that WE trained. They are making billions and billions on oil.
McCain says we need to stay there until the “job is done.” When will the fucking job be done??? What’s the definition of “done?” If any part of “done” is contingent on Iraq doing the job themselves, we’ll be there for another 10 years. Are we to continue risking American lives and spending American capital for a country that is more than happy to take it rather than becoming independent? Its a half-baked strategy that will cost lives, money, time, and international political capital.
Obama says we need a phased withdraw over the next 16 months. He says we need to let Iraq take care of Iraq and let our troops go where we need them or come home. Iraq has the money, it has the troops. Why can’t they do the job? It makes sense.
I say let Iraq spend some billions on tanks, planes, and equipment and stand on their own two feet. They can, they just don’t want to, and who could blame them?
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Ren wrote:
…Like other people said, that whole “golly gee whiz” schtick got old real fast.
I can understand why big city folks would feel this way. Small town and country folks like me don’t have a problem with it.
No big deal; some of us take off our boots at the end of the day and some of us take off our Gucci loafers. I bet I know what you’ve been wearing.[/quote]
I live in St.Bonifacius MN. We have two gas stations, three bars, one church and some store fronts on mainstreet. I grew up in Lake Elmo, MN. We had one gas station, one bar, and one church.
Around here we call them shoes, not loafers.
[quote]flightspeed wrote:
I thought they both did well, but they didn’t get into one issue on Iraq that, in my opinion, delineates the difference between the two tickets.
We are spending 10 billion a month acting as a security force for Iraq.
[/quote]
The question no lib will ever answer is what happens if we pull out too early.
This is weak. Would you want another countries military policing your’s?
The job is done when the commanders in the field say it’s done. You obviously don’t have the stomach for war. You don’t go in willy nilly (like we did) and don’t just pull out when ever you get sick of being in there.
[quote]
Obama says we need a phased withdraw over the next 16 months. He says we need to let Iraq take care of Iraq and let our troops go where we need them or come home. Iraq has the money, it has the troops. Why can’t they do the job? It makes sense.
[/quote] immediatly, first year in office, 18 months, 16 months…just wait, it will change again. Who the fuck is Barak? He has never served much less been a general. Hmmm…who do I want making critical military decisions barak or a military general.
[quote]
I say let Iraq spend some billions on tanks, planes, and equipment and stand on their own two feet. They can, they just don’t want to, and who could blame them? [/quote]
Sounds easy. building a country and a military from scratch shouldn’t take too long. Especially in a backwards country that still has armed tribes. You’re pretty fucking bright.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
She did “OK” overall, but McCain’s popularity has been falling and to really help her campaign, she needed to hit a home run out of the ball park. I dont feel that she did that tonight. [/quote]
I agree. She didn’t perform well enough to get support for McCain. But she didn’t hurt him either, and if she had come across as she did in previous interviews and public statements she definitely would have. Overall, the debate was a wash like most VP debates and will have little impact on how people vote.
[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Look, folks…I see it everyday…
If the Obama campaign and any voter doubts the “folksy/gee-whiz/hockey mom/giggly cheerleader” appeal of Palin…they are going to be completely blindsided come November.
Biden may be respected on some corners; but this woman is LOVED…
Discount this appeal, or keep writing it off as lacking substance…and you’ll see Palin wielding that gavel in the Senate Chambers.
Mufasa[/quote]
I think there is much more to this than most people are recognizing. Even some some city folks will find it irresistible. On the other hand that will be mitigated some by turning some others.
Only because it’s transparent and ridiculous. You don’t have to be from Wasilla Alaska to be down-to-earth and in touch with the average American. Biden is from Scranton. Obama grew up underprivileged and rose far. Biden touched on this but never really made the message hit home. And if Palin is in touch with and understands ‘simple small town folk’ McCain is certainly not.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Look, folks…I see it everyday…
If the Obama campaign and any voter doubts the “folksy/gee-whiz/hockey mom/giggly cheerleader” appeal of Palin…they are going to be completely blindsided come November.
Biden may be respected on some corners; but this woman is LOVED…
Discount this appeal, or keep writing it off as lacking substance…and you’ll see Palin wielding that gavel in the Senate Chambers.
Mufasa
I think there is much more to this than most people are recognizing. Even some some city folks will find it irresistible. On the other hand that will be mitigated some by turning some others.
[/quote]
It wouldn’t be annoying if she didn’t intentionally play it up so much. And if she didn’t act like she had cornered the market on ‘down home appeal.’
[quote]jsbrook wrote:
<<< It wouldn’t be annoying if she didn’t intentionally play it up so much. And if she didn’t act like she had cornered the market on ‘down home appeal.’[/quote]
I believe you may be even more annoyed to learn that she probably isn’t playing it up at all. I lived in Valdez for 5 months in 1989 and that’s pretty much how they talk. At least the ones who’ve been there a long time.
Diplomacy: Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/foreign_policy/