Chilly Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I wouldn't count your eggs, Obama didn't look so hot going up against Clinton this spring, most agreed that he lost those debates. Obama is an amazing speaker, not debater. I, too, wasn't impressed when I saw Obama debate Clinton. I also wasn't impressed by McCain in the GOP debates.
John Adams Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 McCain's strength is the town hall-style debate, which is one of the reasons why the media has loved him so much over the years. It would be no shock that he did well in this format. However, in a 1-on-1 debate where they can respond to each other, it will be no shock when he loses those. I think you're right to a point. In a real debate, McCain would likely win. In the watered down, pre-submitted question format where the candidates just make speeches in response to questions, I think Obama will do fine. It will be to McCain's advantage to go off-script when he can, to see if Obama is nimble enough to respond. The election is Obama's to lose, and the debates are one place where he'll have to be careful. He'll probably just stick to a script. The other danger zone for Obama will be his VP choice. If he clears those hurdles without controversy, he should roll to a win.
jimshiz Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I have to give credit to Obama for participating, it was like walking into the lion's den as a liberal and he also prob p!ssed off a bunch of liberal supporters (who will vote for him anyways) but in the end I don't think he prob helped himself much, if anything McCain prob strengthened his "base". In the end, although he can show his faith, Obama is a liberal that stands for issues that tick off evangelists. Why doesn't the ACLU or MoveOn.org hold a similar forum with the same format. There are probably hundreds of reasons I will vote for the person that I will vote for and none of them are "religious" reasons.
Chilly Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I think you're right to a point. In a real debate, McCain would likely win. In the watered down, pre-submitted question format where the candidates just make speeches in response to questions, I think Obama will do fine. It will be to McCain's advantage to go off-script when he can, to see if Obama is nimble enough to respond. Yeah, you're right, in a more open format of debating McCain would likely win. The election is Obama's to lose, and the debates are one place where he'll have to be careful. He'll probably just stick to a script. The other danger zone for Obama will be his VP choice. If he clears those hurdles without controversy, he should roll to a win. I think its a lot closer than that. Right now, McCain needs just one more state to flop sides (like Minnesota, for example), and he'll be up in the electoral count. The most important current statistic is that Independents are split into 1/3rds between McCain, Obama, and Undecided. Obama needs to make sure the Independents break for him in a large way.
/dev/null Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I think its a lot closer than that. Right now, McCain needs just one more state to flop sides (like Minnesota, for example), and he'll be up in the electoral count. If you look at the electoral map based on current state polls right now, it's looking alot like the final results of 2004. This website...http://www.electoral-vote.com/...tracks daily polls and has Obama up 275-250 with 13 tied (VA) Compare that to polls of August of 2004 (see the This day in 2004 link on the same website) and the election doesn't look like its as big of a slam dunk as some are hoping
John Adams Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 If you look at the electoral map based on current state polls right now, it's looking alot like the final results of 2004. This website...http://www.electoral-vote.com/...tracks daily polls and has Obama up 275-250 with 13 tied (VA) Compare that to polls of August of 2004 (see the This day in 2004 link on the same website) and the election doesn't look like its as big of a slam dunk as some are hoping I have a gut feel that people are undercounting Obama supporters. He's going to rally voters who have never voted before. Between the 2 candidates, I prefer McCain but I'm one of those undecided Independents. The more they talk, the less I want either one. McCain can still win my vote; Obama probably can't.
Wacka Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I have a gut feel that people are undercounting Obama supporters.He's going to rally voters who have never voted before . Between the 2 candidates, I prefer McCain but I'm one of those undecided Independents. The more they talk, the less I want either one. McCain can still win my vote; Obama probably can't. We hear that from the dems every four years and it doesn't happen.
Chilly Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I have a gut feel that people are undercounting Obama supporters. He's going to rally voters who have never voted before. Between the 2 candidates, I prefer McCain but I'm one of those undecided Independents. The more they talk, the less I want either one. McCain can still win my vote; Obama probably can't. I'll believe it when I see it, as history shows those voters are unreliable as all hell, especially after a huge primary turnout.
/dev/null Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I have a gut feel that people are undercounting Obama supporters. He's going to rally voters who have never voted before. Between the 2 candidates, I prefer McCain but I'm one of those undecided Independents. The more they talk, the less I want either one. McCain can still win my vote; Obama probably can't. I'm with Wacka and Bluefire on the "first time voter thing" And concerning the undecideds you mentioned, my gut tells me they will break in favor of McCain. Just a hunch, most undecideds I know don't like either candidate but are more comfortable with McCain than Obama. The Obama bandwagon has left the station and is so far ahead of itself that they won't pick up many more stragglers
JK2000 Posted August 18, 2008 Author Posted August 18, 2008 Worst thing that McCain could do now is rehash his stance against Roe v Wade. I love how McCain listed the 5 Justices who are for Roe v. Wade as Justices he wouldn't nominate because they legislate from the bench, but with the exception of Stevens (McCain wasn't in the Senate yet) McCain voted to confirm them all! Pander much??????????
GG Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I love how McCain listed the 5 Justices who are for Roe v. Wade as Justices he wouldn't nominate because they legislate from the bench, but with the exception of Stevens (McCain wasn't in the Senate yet) McCain voted to confirm them all! Pander much?????????? Are they putting idiot dust into Corn Flakes again? Was the question about nominating or was it about confirming?
JK2000 Posted August 18, 2008 Author Posted August 18, 2008 Are they putting idiot dust into Corn Flakes again? Was the question about nominating or was it about confirming? Why would you vote to confirm someone you feel "legislates from the bench"? Please keep trying to excuse McCain's shameful pandering to the religious right.
GG Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 Why would you vote to confirm someone you feel "legislates from the bench"? Please keep trying to excuse McCain's shameful pandering to the religious right. Do you stop to consider how in a debate on faith with a preacher only one candidate panders to the electorate?
buckeyemike Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I've seen you post here before and expected the exact opposite response to this thread from you. That's a logically well-stated position. Not one I'm in 100% agreement with but it's sensible and I wish other Christians mimicked you instead of others. Thanks for the compliment. We can always agree to disagree. Someone posted here a link from Alan Alda's character on The West Wing...that's probably my favorite scene from the entire series..."if you have a question about religion, go to church". Most TV critics say the Arnold Vinick (Alda) character on that show was modeled after McCain. We'll see. I don't think we've really seen the true John McCain yet. As for the election, I put Obama's odds of winning at 2-1 in his favor. Maybe 3-1. If the Democrats can't regain the White House this year, they might never regain it. And I'm a McCain supporter. I should have supported him 8 years ago.
JK2000 Posted August 18, 2008 Author Posted August 18, 2008 Do you stop to consider how in a debate on faith with a preacher only one candidate panders to the electorate? This is hands down the most incoherent sentence I've ever been forced to read.
GG Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 This is hands down the most incoherent sentence I've ever been forced to read. I truly feel for you, if compound sentences give you trouble in life.
JK2000 Posted August 18, 2008 Author Posted August 18, 2008 I truly feel for you, if compound sentences give you trouble in life. What's that comma for? How long have you been speaking English?
GG Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 What's that comma for? How long have you been speaking English? I threw, in, the, extra, commas, since sentences confuse you (among other concepts).
JK2000 Posted August 18, 2008 Author Posted August 18, 2008 I threw, in, the, extra, commas, since sentences confuse you (among other concepts). Nice try. It wouldn't have anything to do with your below average intelligence, now would it?
John Adams Posted August 18, 2008 Posted August 18, 2008 I love how McCain listed the 5 Justices who are for Roe v. Wade as Justices he wouldn't nominate because they legislate from the bench, but with the exception of Stevens (McCain wasn't in the Senate yet) McCain voted to confirm them all! Pander much?????????? There's a huge difference there. If I was a senator, I'd confirm most of the justices sent to me by the president, unless I harbored serious doubts about their ability to do the job. I would not necessarily nominate those same people if I was president myself. Is that so hard to understand?
Recommended Posts