Obama, Get Your Ass Back to DC & Deal w/ Terrorism

[BT]

The choice of Palin gave McCain a much needed bump in the polls. Why do you think the crass vitriol against her and her family was so ferocious?
.

[Stray Pooch]

The choice of Palin gave McCain a much needed bump in the polls.

They lost.

Why do you think the crass vitriol against her and her family was so ferocious?

It worked.

[BT]

It worked.

Worked with Romney too. Didn't make it right.

[BSB]

The notion that the invasion of Iraq during Bush II's time in the oval office was merely a continuation of Gulf War I, is a ruse. While that GW benefited both politically, and militarily, from Gulf War I, is without question. But the Iraq war itself is a book written entirely by Bush II, and his predecessors, and only under certain particular historical perspectives would it be a sequel to his fathers book.

[BT]

But the Iraq war itself is a book written entirely by Bush II, and his predecessors, and only under certain particular historical perspectives would it be a sequel to his fathers book.

Never said it was sequel, said it was a continuation. Just as Bush1's war was a continuation of policies going back to the 70's with the ascension of Saddam and his war with Iran.

Same goes for Bin Laden and Al Queda. History isn't an event it is a series of events.

[Plane]

Congress urged regime change in 98, signed into law by Clinton. Perhaps the Bush Doctrine is more accurately the Clinton Doctrine.

I recall that there was something called the "Clinton doctrine" but I don't recall what it was about.

The "Powell Doctrine " was to have a clear goal and to bring enough to win.

[Plane]

I thought that Dean did not deserve to loose because of that scream. I thought that Quaile was a lot sharper than he looked on outtakes.

And a canadate that doesn't know one buzzword does not bother me a-tall.

There is a jargon for every profession , comeing in from the outside is indeed one of the really appealing things about Palin , so her not being up on jargon is also appealing to me , no matter that it offends insiders like talking heads or pundits of pundits.

It does not prove her unwise , it is a bit ot ignorance that proves she is from the outside of the political incestuous cyclone.

[Rich]

>>I'm not really talking about blame or credit - just the result.  Sarah was a choice - like any other running mate - designed to help the Prez candidate's chances.   It didn't work.<<

I'd say it did. We all remember the problems McCain had with the base of the Republican party. Bringing Palin to the ticket energized the base and brought a lot of the base back iunto the Republican fold. In my case it made me hold my nose for little less time in the voting booth when I voted for McCain.

So as far as the ticket goes, Palin won, and ultimately McCain lost.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Choosing Palin did NOT WORK.

Had it worked, McCain would have won.

It's really that simple.

[Plane]

Choosing Palin did NOT WORK.

Had it worked, McCain would have won.

It's really that simple.

So Chooseing Biden is the real reason that BHO is president?

Or was Quaile the important factor in the 41 Bush election?

[Rich]

No, you're really that simple.

[Stray Pooch]

It worked.

Worked with Romney too. Didn't make it right.

So what does right have to do with it.   Romney lost because he was a Mormon - at least partially.  It would have been morally right to nominate Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in 1964.  And it would have been a ridiculous mistake.


I am not talking about what is right, what is fair, what is noble or what is the will of the people.  I am talking about nothing more nor less than what will get the White House back in 2012.   I'd vote for Romney in 2012 too, but I doubt that it would be any better a choice.

[Stray Pooch]

>>I'm not really talking about blame or credit - just the result.  Sarah was a choice - like any other running mate - designed to help the Prez candidate's chances.   It didn't work.<<

I'd say it did. We all remember the problems McCain had with the base of the Republican party. Bringing Palin to the ticket energized the base and brought a lot of the base back iunto the Republican fold. In my case it made me hold my nose for little less time in the voting booth when I voted for McCain.

So as far as the ticket goes, Palin won, and ultimately McCain lost.

That's all so much semantics.  Sarah Palin helped a little to gain McCain some points inside the party.  She even made the term "maverick" seem sexy.   So what?  Nothing was going to get a Republican elected in 2008 except a strong, well-supported, exciting leader who brought out Republican voters and appealed to the independents.   Sarah Palin was interesting as a sideshow to Republicans.  She was nothing more.  Anybody who still thinks that the way to get a Republican in the White House is to nominate a strong conservative is deluded.  Part of the younger  Bush's initial appeal to the masses was that he had a reputation for being "A uniter -not a divider" in his home state.  In 2004 he stayed in place because nobody trusted Kerry and we were all still concerned about security.   Obama won in 2008 because he was able to get out the vote and his ultra-left mindset was in stealth mode.   Nancy Pelosi couldn't get elected dogcatcher by the American electorate because everybody knows what she is about and only the far left would vote for her.   Jesse Helms would never have had a chance.  Just because a candidate appeals to a large enough section of a party to get the nomination does NOT mean s/he will win a general election.

I maintain that Sarah Palin will not win a general election, and the growing perception that she is the future of the Republican party makes me see Obama as a two-term President.

[BT]

Nothing was going to get a Republican elected in 2008 except a strong, well-supported, exciting leader who brought out Republican voters and appealed to the independents. 

Sounds like Palin to me.

What makes you think she doesn't appeal to independents? What makes you think she wouldn't appeal to Blue Dog Reagan Dems?

I have never claimed she is the future of the GOP. What she is, is a viable candidate.

[Religious Dick]

Whether or not Palin can get elected will have a lot to do with how pissed off people are with Obama by 2010.

It was said about Reagan that he was too conservative, too outside the mainstream to get elected. All of which usually would have been true. I can't see him having got elected in 1968, 1972 or 1976. But by 1980 people were so fed up with Carter the Republicans could have nominated a lamp post and still handily won.

Of course, whether it's to the Republican's advantage to win the presidency in 2012 is a whole 'nother question. By the end of that president's term, a lot of entitlement spending is going to come due for retiring boomers, and likely by then the Chinese will have cut up our credit card. There are problems that won't go away no matter who's in power. And whoever is in power is going to carry the can for it, fairly or not.

It might very well be a good idea for the Republicans to sit this one out, and leave the Democrats holding the bag for the collapse. My take is that they have nothing to lose by nominating the lady moose hunter. Politicians have overcome bigger obstacles than blowing an interview with Katie Couric. It doesn't matter how much people hate your candidate - as long as they hate the other guy's candidate more.