The McCain Thread

[UltimateJustin]

Well if you and Superman believe it by all means it is clearly the right path.

You take away the threat of war and you paint yourself as the target to every country who is envious of our power and position in the world, a target to every extremist who disagrees with our culture, a target to every thief that wants a piece of our pie.

In an ideal world War is waste of human life.

In the real world War is a terrible necessity.

The solution to that argument is both simple and obvious. Countries are envious toward us because we take advantage of the world market, produce the lion's share of waste and consume the most energy and feast on the remains of the countries we exploit. How about, instead of dropping another atomic bomb on our enemies, we make an effort to spread our wealth and solve the problems, diplomatically, that have other countries wanting to put targets out on us to begin with. The reason republicans pretend this wouldn't work is that their party is in bed with big business, specifically the oil tycoons, and most of their idealogies run on the blood of the children of others. LOL.

 

[Anita18]

Palin was 100% the incorrect choice for VP. McCain was going to get all the staunch republican votes no matter what, and he needed to capture more of the centrists. I was leaning towards McCain prior to his selection of Sarah Palin. I then was firmly decided to vote for Obama after that.

That's the thing for me. Why pander to your base? It's just preaching to the choir, and they'll still be there unless you do something REALLY stupid to piss them off, like support gay marriage and abortion.

Obama's strategy of winning the independents and the untapped youth vote seems like the obvious route to go, because those people are truly undecided. It showed yesterday with the record voter turnout.

But I suppose the conservative base has the most money?

I know women love Palin. And I can see why. She's a mom, a govenor, the bread winner in her family, and very attractive as well. But she was terribly unqualified. I guess he was low on options though.

Older women who are moms, maybe. All of the women my age (single, early-mid-20's) ran away from her like the plague.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

1. Bush
2. Bush
3. Bush

 

[UltimateJustin]

Of course war should be an option, but it should be the last options, when the other options haven't worked and it should be planned very careful before it is executed. One shouldn't big to war willy nilly and one should never fight a war on two fronts, unless they can prove beyond a shadow of doubt there is no other option. Bush didn't do any of that and that's one of the reasons his party lost.



If weren't that popular, why did the Dems take more seats. the congress may not have been popular (because Bush blocked very attempt they made to change things) but the party itself was still way more popular then the GOP.

Dude, cause most people voted for Obama and it's easily to hit straight ticket than rifle through 100 names on a ballot!

 

[SuBe]

The solution to that argument is both simple and obvious. Countries are envious toward us because we take advantage of the world market, produce the lion's share of waste and consume the most energy and feast on the remains of the countries we exploit. How about, instead of dropping another atomic bomb on our enemies, we make an effort to spread our wealth and solve the problems, diplomatically, that have other countries wanting to put targets out on us to begin with. The reason republicans pretend this wouldn't work is that their party is in bed with big business, specifically the oil tycoons, and most of their idealogies run on the blood of the children of others. LOL.

"Spread the wealth"?

Sorry, communism lost the cold war.

 

[Spider-Fan]

1- Bush. Very unpopular.
2- The economy. It went south on him at a bad time.
3- Barack Obama. He connected with voters in a way McCain could not, and ran a better and more organized campaign.

Other factors can be stated, but these are my big 3.

 

[donk70]

1. 95% voting the same way as Bush
2. Admitting he wasn't strong on the economy
3. Palin

 

[UltimateJustin]

"Spread the wealth"?

Sorry, communism lost the cold war.

Yeah, but that was twenty years ago, and like all things from the 80's it's time for an unnecessary comeback.

 

[BlackLantern]

Not one woman in my family, or that I know...even most of the women at my job hated the **** out of Palin

 

[SuBe]

Yeah, but that was twenty years ago, and like all things from the 80's it's time for an unnecessary comeback.

You think just because a Communist Nation lost political power, that the ideology went away? What do Former Communist Nations do, to help there economies?

 

[StorminNorman]

Just after, you know...she got done dealing with her own corruption.

She was found to be innocent.

Of course war should be an option, but it should be the last options, when the other options haven't worked and it should be planned very careful before it is executed. One shouldn't big to war willy nilly and one should never fight a war on two fronts, unless they can prove beyond a shadow of doubt there is no other option. Bush didn't do any of that and that's one of the reasons his party lost.

Bush did try other methods in Iraq, though I agree - you shouldn't fight a two front war.

Actually, to be fair the Democratic Congress is not very popular either, but they didn't invent enemy countries to invade and thats one of the main issues with conscientious voters.

Bush didn't invent Iraq. Iraq was a country whose risk to America was something almost all American leaders agreed on.

The solution to that argument is both simple and obvious. Countries are envious toward us because we take advantage of the world market, produce the lion's share of waste and consume the most energy and feast on the remains of the countries we exploit. How about, instead of dropping another atomic bomb on our enemies, we make an effort to spread our wealth and solve the problems, diplomatically, that have other countries wanting to put targets out on us to begin with. The reason republicans pretend this wouldn't work is that their party is in bed with big business, specifically the oil tycoons, and most of their idealogies run on the blood of the children of others. LOL.

You constantly prove your ignorance.

You do realize that America has been the MOST philanthropic country in the last 50 years, yes? We do more for AIDS in Africa, for Global Hunger, for Poverty than ANY OTHER COUNTRY. That is not up for debate. Our military provides strength for democratic allies that face outside pressure from hostile nations. Our military supplies aid in disasters such as the Tsunami and terrorist attacks.

America is not a country that has a duty to "spread the wealth", no country has that duty. "Spreading the wealth" does not work - period. When you rob from the rich and give to the poor you simply lower the ceiling on success.

1. Bush
2. Bush
3. Bush

Except McCain was leading polls with Bush being Bush and McCain being Republican.

 

[UltimateJustin]

You think just because a Communist Nation lost political power, that the ideology went away? What do Former Communist Nations do, to help there economies?

Lots of crap, read a book.

 

[Asr]

1. Obama's better strategy and advertising.
2. McCain's negative & fearmongering strategy, including his economic position.
3. Sarah Palin.

 

[SuBe]

Lots of crap, read a book.

Insightful. I'll take it that you don't know.

 

[The Overlord]

Bush did try other methods in Iraq, though I agree - you shouldn't fight a two front war.

.

He didn't try very hard, there were weapon inspectors on the ground before the war in Iraq, maybe if they were allowed to do their job then we could have avoided a two front war. The fact is Obama needs to cut the spending to reduce the debet and Iraq is a giant, unpopular money pit, that seems like a good place to get money from.

"Spread the wealth"?

Sorry, communism lost the cold war.

Yeah, spreading the wealth is bad, unless you are using it for corporate welfare, like Bush does.

 

[StorminNorman]

He didn't try very hard, there were weapon inspectors on the ground before the war in Iraq, maybe if they were allowed to do their job then we could have avoided a two front war. The fact is Obama needs to cut the spending to reduce the debet and Iraq is a giant, unpopular money pit, that seems like a good place to get money from.

Saddam Hussein wasn't cooperating with Weapons Inspectors.

I do agree with Obama's plan to place the financial responsibility of Iraq on the shoulders of its government and oil revenue.

 

[UltimateJustin]

Saddam Hussein wasn't cooperating with Weapons Inspectors.

I do agree with Obama's plan to place the financial responsibility of Iraq on the shoulders of its government and oil revenue.

That's just like Vietnamization and won't work. Another war where we invaded a country then left when the situation got too crazy for us, which is exactly what we need to do NOW, and not wait for Iraq to magically improve military infrastructure.

 

[The Overlord]

Saddam Hussein wasn't cooperating with Weapons Inspectors.

.

So what, they still could have done good a job of finding that there weere no WMDs, its job to work around such things. The fact is Bush ignored traditional just war doctorine with the creation of the Bush doctorine. I believe war can be option, but only if it lines up just war doctorine.

As for iraq, bama should set some hardlines and the iraqi government can't meet them, too bad, this war was never supposed to last this long and we have other economic concerns.

 

[The Senator]

1. The unorganized nature of his campaign.
2. The overtly negative approach of his campaign against Obama and the Democratic Party.
3. The sudden, sharp shift to the right on many political issues-- especially ones which the American public leaned left on, such as the war in Iraq.

 

[StorminNorman]

That's just like Vietnamization and won't work. Another war where we invaded a country then left when the situation got too crazy for us, which is exactly what we need to do NOW, and not wait for Iraq to magically improve military infrastructure.

You do realize that the Iraqi Government now controls almost the entirety of the county? That attacks on US Troops are dramatically down? That Iraq is now a country of relative peace? That the Iraqi Government has actually met 16 of the 18 benchmarks.

We don't have to wait for Iraq to magically improve military infrastructure. They have already done it.

Stick to Superman and The Dark Knight, you are proving you know little in the area of World Affairs.

 

[Shemtov]

1. bush
2. economy
3. people felt it would look racist if they voted against obama.

 

[EdRyder]

Saddam Hussein wasn't cooperating with Weapons Inspectors.

http://downingstreetmemo.com/docs/memotext.pdf

 

[UltimateJustin]

You do realize that the Iraqi Government now controls almost the entirety of the county? That attacks on US Troops are dramatically down? That Iraq is now a country of relative peace? That the Iraqi Government has actually met 16 of the 18 benchmarks.

We don't have to wait for Iraq to magically improve military infrastructure. They have already done it.

Stick to Superman and The Dark Knight, you are proving you know little in the area of World Affairs.

Is that how you feel?

 

[Warhammer]

1. Economy (He would have fared better had the main focus been on terrorism and overseas. Inconvenient timing for McCain.)
2. Negativity/"Fear politics"
3. Media (negative press, his age, Sarah Palin, etc.)

 

[Superman]

You know, It's a sad shame that McCain's best speech all year was his last speech.

I liked McCain in 2000, I even considered voting for him, But something happend to him after 2000. I don't know what it was but the man sold his soul to the very people that beat him, BushCo, And after that I and many others lost any and all respect we had for him.