I can't believe what's happening.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

John McCain is going to win the election.

It’s going to be a catastrophe for America, there’s nothing that anyone can do to stop it and it’s so, so awful to watch.

Only Americans get to choose their President but everybody else in the world has to live with the consequences. From outside America it’s really easy to see that history's about to be thwarted, by a nation that used to guide history, and that John McCain is exactly, 100%, what that nation doesn’t need. Electing Barack Obama America could at a stroke restore its reputation in the world, restore the idea that it stands for possibility and the power of the imagination to make extraordinary changes that actually benefit its citizens, but it's not going to.

Outside America we can all see what an extraordinarily good candidate Obama is, and what an appalling choice John McCain is (if we could vote he would get something like 75% of the votes). This isn’t even like John Kerry and George Bush. It’s the choice between possibility, imagination, redemption and social and financial competence, and deception, stagnation and contempt for the good sense of your citizens.

America used to stand for something enviable, something you had to go to America to get, and right now it doesn’t. It could again but it’s not going to because you’re going to elect John McCain and you’re going to fuck it all up for everybody and for the rest of us, and probably for good.

I know it’s not really “your” fault. It looks like nothing short of a revolution against your domestic sources of information and whatnot is going to be required.

It’s just that I was depressed last time but I knew things would be OK in four years because it would become so abundantly clear what a mistake had been made that it couldn’t possibly happen again and that we still had some time to save the planet, basically.

But it’s happening again, only worse this time, because John McCain’s really an older version of George Bush only with a worse temper and Barack Obama’s a far, far better candidate than John Kerry,

My point?

I’m depressed. How the fuck can this be happening?

[Bergermeister]

Well put.

I am an American, but have lived abroad for almost two decades. Not only am I ashamed of my country of birth, but I am also deeply embarrassed by what is going on. Daily, people (Japanese as well as many other nationalities) ask me if the charade is for real; is this the maturity level of Americans? They dread a McCain presidency as he is seen to have completely lost it and to lack any inkling of a centered soul. Regarding Palin, well, they just keep repeating, "Alaska is close to Russia!" and laughing their heads off. When they settle down, they mention she could start WWIII. Obama is seen as a of ray of hope, but they are worried that McCain may manage to bring him down, too. All in all, the image of America has been severely tarnished; I just hope not permanently so.

[jimmac]

John McCain is going to win the election.

It’s going to be a catastrophe for America, there’s nothing that anyone can do to stop it and it’s so, so awful to watch.

Only Americans get to choose their President but everybody else in the world has to live with the consequences. From outside America it’s really easy to see that history's about to be thwarted, by a nation that used to guide history, and that John McCain is exactly, 100%, what that nation doesn’t need. Electing Barack Obama America could at a stroke restore its reputation in the world, restore the idea that it stands for possibility and the power of the imagination to make extraordinary changes that actually benefit its citizens, but it's not going to.

Outside America we can all see what an extraordinarily good candidate Obama is, and what an appalling choice John McCain is (if we could vote he would get something like 75% of the votes). This isn’t even like John Kerry and George Bush. It’s the choice between possibility, imagination, redemption and social and financial competence, and deception, stagnation and contempt for the good sense of your citizens.

America used to stand for something enviable, something you had to go to America to get, and right now it doesn’t. It could again but it’s not going to because you’re going to elect John McCain and you’re going to fuck it all up for everybody and for the rest of us, and probably for good.

I know it’s not really “your” fault. It looks like nothing short of a revolution against your domestic sources of information and whatnot is going to be required.

It’s just that I was depressed last time but I knew things would be OK in four years because it would become so abundantly clear what a mistake had been made that it couldn’t possibly happen again and that we still had some time to save the planet, basically.

But it’s happening again, only worse this time, because John McCain’s really an older version of George Bush only with a worse temper and Barack Obama’s a far, far better candidate than John Kerry,

My point?

I’m depressed. How the fuck can this be happening?

Well I'm not so sure he's going to win. This latest economic downturn tends to place a bad light on the people who've been in charge for almost a decade. How bad does it really have to get before people wake up?

Plus there's stuff like this : http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/16/palin.investigation/index.html

Palin aide says Obama backers politicizing Alaska investigationStory Highlights
Palin accused of improperly firing public safety commissioner

Aide says case has been "hijacked" by Democrats; Palin won't cooperate

Obama campaign says charge is "complete paranoia"



It kind of sounds like she doesn't like people looking into this. It seems the republican party's still on fire and it's still raining gasoline.

Plus there hasn't been a direct confrontation between the two sides. Debates would be very telling.

Don't give up hope yet.

And yes we 100 % don't need McCain.

[hmurchison]

I think for a minute there people didn't believe the US Global ranking in education. I believe it's roughly around 25 now having sunk since GW took office.

I think it's not abundantly clear after we've voted GW back into office and have basically voted against our own economic interest (many of us) that many in America really are morons.

How else do you respond to the feckless lack of interest in vetting Palin more? You mean to tell me the American public thinks it's ok to have a VP candidate that didn't campaign doesn't want to talk to the press with less than two months to go until the election?

There is so much evidence of moral decay in the citizenry and corporate malfeasance that goes unpunished it boggles the mind. Banks going under, unemployment rising and all people can do is talk about some fetid war going on over in the ME where we're pissing off more and more countries.

People forget that Nations don't always degrade gracefully...many hit the wall and crumble with surprising alacrity.

McCain's campaign has been mean spirited and manipulative but sadly..the American public seems so cynical and morose abou their plight they are actually attracted to this soap opera BS.

At what point to people look up and say "Hey America is NOT that great of a place to live" and stop swilling the patriotic gruel that is pushed at us daily?

Wake up America.

[groverat]

John McCain is not going to win.

Calm the fuck down.

[Bergermeister]

John McCain is not going to win.

Calm the fuck down.

Whether he wins or loses, he has still hurt the country for years to come.

[jimmac]

John McCain is not going to win.

Calm the fuck down.


Really well said!

[jimmac]

Whether he wins or loses, he has still hurt the country for years to come.


No That would be Mr. Bush that's done that.

[SDW2001]

Well I'm not so sure he's going to win. This latest economic downturn tends to place a bad light on the people who've been in charge for almost a decade. How bad does it really have to get before people wake up?

Plus there's stuff like this : http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/16/palin.investigation/index.html



It kind of sounds like she doesn't like people looking into this. It seems the republican party's still on fire and it's still raining gasoline.

Plus there hasn't been a direct confrontation between the two sides. Debates would be very telling.

Don't give up hope yet.

And yes we 100 % don't need McCain.

You're right that McCain may be blamed for the meltdown on Wall Street. However, I must ask: What GOP policies contributed to this meltdown? I'm curious.

[midwinter]

You're right that McCain may be blamed for the meltdown on Wall Street. However, I must ask: What GOP policies contributed to this meltdown? I'm curious.

None of them. No GOP policies have had anything to do with any of this. It simply does not matter that the GOP has controlled almost everything since 1994 and had controlled everything since 2000. In fact, close analysis will show that the Democrats are actually responsible for all of this.

[groverat]

What GOP policies contributed to this meltdown?

Deregulation of financial markets allowing absurdly irresponsible money management.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

John McCain is not going to win.

Calm the fuck down.

Thank-you.

I think that's what I needed to hear.

Now promise me.

[groverat]

McCain had to burn himself to the ground with a hilariously shitty VP pick just to get a temporary bump. (A bump that is eroding already, ahead of expectations.)

He's fucked and he's always been fucked.

It's not likely to be a landslide in Obama's favor, but the only way McCain can win is if something dramatic happened. McCain already played the "loony VP pick" card, what does he have left?

[midwinter]

Deregulation of financial markets allowing absurdly irresponsible money management.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was actually spearheaded by Democrats who were too ashamed to put their names on it, so they conned Gramm into it.

[hardeeharhar]

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was actually spearheaded by Democrats who were too ashamed to put their names on it, so they conned Gramm into it.
Stupid Democrats, what with their bad economic sense and strange ability to get Republicans to do their bidding...

Hi Hassan!

I don't know who is going to win. I am afraid. The ground game could change everything, and Obama's campaign has done everything it could do to win. If they win or lose, it will be because the American people get the politicians they deserve.

[tonton]

Thank-you.

I think that's what I needed to hear.

Now promise me.

He can't promise you that unless he's the CEO of Diebold (Premier Election Solutions)...

[tonton]

It's not likely to be a landslide in Obama's favor, but the only way McCain can win is if something dramatic happened. McCain already played the "loony VP pick" card, what does he have left?

See my above comment.

[jamac]

Well put.

I am an American, but have lived abroad for almost two decades. Not only am I ashamed of my country of birth, but I am also deeply embarrassed by what is going on. Daily, people (Japanese as well as many other nationalities) ask me if the charade is for real; is this the maturity level of Americans? They dread a McCain presidency as he is seen to have completely lost it and to lack any inkling of a centered soul. Regarding Palin, well, they just keep repeating, "Alaska is close to Russia!" and laughing their heads off. When they settle down, they mention she could start WWIII. Obama is seen as a of ray of hope, but they are worried that McCain may manage to bring him down, too. All in all, the image of America has been severely tarnished; I just hope not permanently so.

I am an American of choice, not of birth and I was able to built a good life here. Now I do not know how to speak about my choice to my relatives in my home country.

Here's something I got in an email yesterday, I do not know who authored it:


Once again, just providing info.
>
> I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight.....
>
> * If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're
> "exotic, different."
> * Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American
> story.
>
> * If your name is Barack you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
> * Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.
>
> * Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
> * Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well
> grounded.
>
>
> * If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become
> the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter
> registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12
> years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State
> Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become
> chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee,
> spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a
> state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving
> on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's
> Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
> * If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city
> council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000
> people, 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000
> people, then you're qualified to become the country's second
> highest ranking executive.
>
>
> * If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while
> raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches,
> you're not a real Christian.
> * If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left
> your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're
> a Christian.
>
>
> * If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education,
> including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the
> fiber of society.
> * If , while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with
> no other option in sex education in your state's school system
> while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant , you're very
> responsible.
>
>
> * If your wife is a Harvard graduate laywer who gave up a position
> in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner
> city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's
> values don't represent America's.
> * If you're husband is nicknamed "First Dude", with at least one
> DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to
> vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated
> the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely
> admirable.
>
>
> OK, much clearer now.

[tonton]

I am an American of choice, not of birth and I was able to built a good life here. Now I do not know how to speak about my choice to my relatives in my home country.

Here's something I got in an email yesterday, I do not know who authored it:

What a fucking Elitist post. Why do you hate America?

[addabox]

I guess we'll see.

It looks to me that McCain has gone all in on the post-verifiable truth strategy; this is the pay-off for a decades long Republican campaign to delegitimize all trusted collective sources of information (science, "expertise", the media) so that they are free to assert anything at all without fear of persuasive contradiction.

So now we have the McCain campaign openly lying about pretty much everything, and all but taunting the media when they get called on it. The idea appears to be that they think they can talk directly to voters who no longer trust any source that they aren't ideologically inclined to agree with, so that no matter how strenuous the lie or how often the facts get aired, nothing will penetrate the bubble they are creating. What's happening now is far beyond the usual exaggeration and dissembling of a political campaign-- it's a full out assault on the very idea of verifiable truth.

I say "we'll see" because it's not clear to me that this is a winning strategy, for two reasons.

One, it means making making a sort of death pact with your base. At some level many of the people cheering, for instance, Palin's "thanks, but no thanks" line must realize that it doesn't actually mean anything-- that she is not, in fact, any kind of pork or earmark fighter. So what are they cheering for? We can lie to ourselves and that stupid liberal media is powerless to stop us? Truth is what we say it is, fuck you? If we keep this up we'll surely win the election, because some other people probably believe what she's saying?

No matter how this is playing, at some level it is very corrosive to the people it is designed to fire up. You can't structure a world based on repeated, overt lies and expect to draw on good will and enthusiasm. You're not "energizing" your base, you're conducting some kind of bleak sociological experiment. I think it's as likely that this consigns the Republicans to a kind of distasteful cult status as wins an election.

Two, once you're outside the bubble, how does this strike you? Are independents as likely to eschew all outside information? It's been slowly building for a while now, but we're seeing the emergence of consensus (yes, in the, God help us, media) that the McCain campaign is making lying into the central technique of their campaign. Independent voters are not immune to this information, and, in fact, we're starting to see erosion in the post-Palin positives. It seems likely, now, that either McCain will have to back off on the lies, or his campaign will come to be generally regarded as the most dishonest ever. That's not going to be a problem with the base, but the base can't win the election. Independents are likely to get turned off.

And, we're now facing what Alan Greenspan is calling a "once in a century" economic conflagration. In genuinely difficult times, culture war figures like Palin lose their luster, as voters start thinking seriously about how the hell we're going to navigate the next four years. John McCain seems weirdly tone-deaf, clueless or both in all things economic, and has only lies about Obama's proposed policies on offer. Is that really enough to earn the trust of voters who are starting to wonder what the hell is going on? Does hearing that Palin hung out in the vicinity of Russia do anything to improve on that?

[shetline]

Thank-you.

I think that's what I needed to hear.

Now promise me.
I still think there's a decent chance Obama will win, but it saddens me that the election is even close enough to have to worry about it. Obama should be an absolute shoo-in.

[BRussell]

One thing I know for sure - we'll get what we deserve.

[groverat]

Save that pessimistic shit for December. Until then, do your part to make the right thing happen.

[shetline]

One thing I know for sure - we'll get what we deserve.
What you mean "we"?

I don't believe in collective punishment and I don't give a damn about what any arbitrary composite entity "deserves". While I try to do what I can to help, I can't overcome the idiocy of others on my own, I can't undo the advantage of moneyed interests on my own, and I can't undo the Red-state bias of the Electoral College system on my own. I accept no responsibility for the obstinate stupidity of other voters.

[Hassan i Sabbah]

OK.

What can I do? I live in Europe.

I'm going slightly batty.

Really, really sorry for the hysteria. It's just that I woke up this morning really depressed about it and got tapping away. This is why I don't have a blog. Sorry.

But the Republicans have their own TV channel, for fuck's sake, John McCain's trying to turn black into white, and the American body politic is seriously demented.

I'll keep my panic to myself. Polls are narrowing. Obama is a decent and very inspiring human being, and he's fighting back with some seriously hardcore advertisements of his own, which happen to be true (fancy.)

Oh, hey 'bobski!

[sammi jo]

I still think there's a decent chance Obama will win, but it saddens me that the election is even close enough to have to worry about it. Obama should be an absolute shoo-in.

It looks as if 2008 will be a repeat of 2000 and 2004: the games have already started. For example, in Ohio and other swing states, voters in urban and inner city areas (ie mostly Democrat) have been receiving voter registration forms en masse with incorrect return addresses, courtesy of the McCain campaign.

- The Florida Secretary of State decided on September 8th to enforce the state's "no-match, no-vote" law, a voter registration law that blocked more than 16,000 eligible Florida citizens from registering to vote in 2006, through no fault of their own, and could disenfranchise tens of thousands more voters in November. Republican Secretary of State Kurt Browning's last-minute decision to implement the law in the final month before the registration deadline will post a significant hurdle to eligible Florida citizens hoping to vote in November...........

- Also in Ohio, a Republican passed election law could disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters. The Democratic Secretary of State describes it as an unconstitutional law that allows Ohio county election boards to cancel a voter's registration solely because some election notices mailed to a home address come back undeliverable.............

- It is not only the Diebold electronic voting system that has problems – they all do. A security review of the Sequoia voting system this summer found serious security and other flaws. Sequoia, along with ES&S voting systems, are the subject of a new paper, and video issued by the Computer Security Group at the University of California, Santa Barbara. The paper clarifies that security is lacking in both Sequoia and ES&S voting systems: “the electronic voting systems that we have reviewed are neither secure nor well-designed..........

The Computer Security Group paper also discusses the failure of the certification process which does not and cannot adequately secure a software driven voting system. The failure of certification is also examined by a report this month issued by the GAO which describes numerous instances of problems with voting machines...........
Plenty more examples here (http://www.countercurrents.org/zeese160908.htm).

Its amazing that so many people are under the impression that an Obama administration represents "change". Sure, things couldn't possibly get much worse than 8 years of the Axis of Neocon, but at least the enemy was easily identifiable. If by some fluke Obama gets elected, will the liberal side express: "phew, the nightmare's over, now I stop my activism, pull my guard down and get on with my life again?" McCain will almost undoubtedly win this election, probably though dishonest means, as did Bush twice in succession. Obama has a lot more to contend with than just Republican voters. The exit polls will tell the true story, if they get any media airtime, that is.

[BRussell]

What you mean "we"?

I don't believe in collective punishment and I don't give a damn about what any arbitrary composite entity "deserves". While I try to do what I can to help, I can't overcome the idiocy of others on my own, I can't undo the advantage of moneyed interests on my own, and I can't undo the Red-state bias of the Electoral College system on my own. I accept no responsibility for the obstinate stupidity of other voters.
The idea that "we get what we deserve" seems to me to be pretty fundamental to democracy. If the country prefers McCain, we'll get McCain. And if we prefer McCain, it seems to me that we deserve him, for better or worse.

[tonton]

The idea that "we get what we deserve" seems to me to be pretty fundamental to democracy. If the country prefers McCain, we'll get McCain. And if we prefer McCain, it seems to me that we deserve him, for better or worse.

If McCain wins, then those of us who vote for Obama get him too, and we certainly deserve better.

[shetline]

The idea that "we get what we deserve" seems to me to be pretty fundamental to democracy. If the country prefers McCain, we'll get McCain. And if we prefer McCain, it seems to me that we deserve him, for better or worse.
If I'm one of ten people in a boat and the nine other people in the boat stand up, start dancing around, and flip the boat over, *I* don't deserve to get wet, and I certainly wouldn't deserve to drown.

To say "the people in the boat deserved to get wet" wouldn't really mean much of anything to me, and I sure as hell wouldn't feel personally responsible for the mess the others created, or feel deserving of the end result.

Rather than saying "we get what we deserve" I'd say "we collectively benefit from or endure politcal results partially determined by a very approximate measure of the very abstract concept of 'collective will', with that measurement taken within an environment unduly influenced by the interests of the rich and powerful".

Sure, that's not as short and pithy as "we get what we deserve", but in my opinion much more accurate, and without the nasty aftertaste of having someone try to tell me I personally deserve Bush, or potentially McCain.

[vinea]

What you mean "we"?

I don't believe in collective punishment and I don't give a damn about what any arbitrary composite entity "deserves". While I try to do what I can to help, I can't overcome the idiocy of others on my own, I can't undo the advantage of moneyed interests on my own, and I can't undo the Red-state bias of the Electoral College system on my own. I accept no responsibility for the obstinate stupidity of other voters.

We put a Republican govenor in Maryland. Damned if I really understand how.

There's as much moneyed interests on the blue side as the red side. If Obama loses it really will be the fault of democrats.

[BRussell]

If I'm one of ten people in a boat and the nine other people in the boat stand up, start dancing around, and flip the boat over, *I* don't deserve to get wet, and I certainly wouldn't deserve to drown.

To say "the people in the boat deserved to get wet" wouldn't really mean much of anything to me, and I sure as hell wouldn't feel personally responsible for the mess the others created, or feel deserving of the end result.

Rather than saying "we get what we deserve" I'd say "we collectively benefit from or endure politcal results partially determined by a very approximate measure of the very abstract concept of 'collective will', with that measurement taken within an environment unduly influenced by the interests of the rich and powerful".

Sure, that's not as short and pithy as "we get what we deserve", but in my opinion much more accurate, and without the nasty aftertaste of having someone try to tell me I personally deserve Bush, or potentially McCain. I'm not saying that every individual will be happy or benefit from the election. Obviously people who vote for the losing candidate will be ticked off and won't have had their vote represent the outcome. But that doesn't change the fact that the country will make a choice and that choice best represents what they wanted. And people have their reasons for voting as they do. I don't really buy this idea that people are being unduly influenced in such a way that the election doesn't represent their views. For example, Republicans cut taxes. Sure, that puts us into debt, but if people don't care about that and just vote for tax cuts no matter the long-term consequences, then they should vote for Republicans, and "they'll get what they deserve."

[vinea]

The only thing that I find surprising at all is that anyone is surprised by all of this.

Let's do the math here:

1. Over the past several decades this country has slowly, steadily and consistently built up an entity we call the federal government that now has a massive amount of power, control and money, and

2. A public educational system which appears to have slowly, steadily and consistently dumbed down generation after generation

And anyone is surprised that:

1. There are people (groups and individuals) willing fight ruthlessly, unethically, sleezily, tooth and nail and spend hundreds of millions (even billions) of dollars to get control of this governmental apparatus of power, control and plunder, and that

2. The general voting public will go along with the superficial and deceitful shenanigans

Huh? I mean seriously. Wake up. What is amazing to me is how few people see all of this for what it is.

The question is why folks that think themselves as intelligent fall for it.

[BRussell]

2. A public educational system which appears to have slowly, steadily and consistently dumbed down generation after generation Are you really saying that the public educational system has made people dumber? Compared to what? Nothing I've seen shows that private schools are better at educating students than public schools today, and certainly the public education system has resulted in many more people having formal education than before the public education system existed. What exactly are you saying?

[BRussell]

Yes I am.

Oh and more compliant to authority and power as well.

Oh and more endeared toward big government.

Again I'd just like you to be a bit more explicit about it. Aren't more people educated now that we have a public system? Aren't today's private schools similar in educational outcomes to public schools? And weren't pre-public schools far more authoritarian than today's schools?

[midwinter]

Yes I am.

Oh and more compliant to authority and power as well.

Oh and more endeared toward big government.

More compliant, more endeared than what?

[Frank777]

Hassan's first post is hilarious. AI-Hall of Fame type of stuff. And Groverat's the voice of reason. Classic.

Why is anyone surprised that this became a horse race?
It's like wondering why the third question in Family Feud helped the Smith family get back into contention.

Relax Hassan. It's still Obama's race to win.

[SDW2001]

John McCain is going to win the election.

It’s going to be a catastrophe for America, there’s nothing that anyone can do to stop it and it’s so, so awful to watch.

Really...a catastrophe? I'm curious as to how you arrive at that. Let's see...let me guess: McCain will stay in Iraq? He's an old white guy? A warmonger? His wife has big knockers?



Only Americans get to choose their President but everybody else in the world has to live with the consequences.

Well, that's the way the cookie crumbles. Sorry, champ.

From outside America it’s really easy to see that history's about to be thwarted, by a nation that used to guide history, and that John McCain is exactly, 100%, what that nation doesn’t need. Electing Barack Obama America could at a stroke restore its reputation in the world, restore the idea that it stands for possibility and the power of the imagination to make extraordinary changes that actually benefit its citizens, but it's not going to.

I don't know why "history" is going to be "thwarted." Unless, of course, you mean that The Chosen One will be denied his prize. Secondly, the only reason Obama would help restore America's reputation in the world is because for some reason, the "world" likes him. He's popular. It's not that his policies would be any better.



Outside America we can all see what an extraordinarily good candidate Obama is,

Um, do you know anything about Barack Obama? Do you know that he has described his relationship with William Ayers of the Weather Underground as "friendly?" Do you know that he subscirbed to Black Liberation Theology for the past 20 years? Do you realize he has virtually no executive experience? Are you aware of the massive tax increases he is proposing, and the new social spending?

and what an appalling choice John McCain is (if we could vote he would get something like 75% of the votes).

Again...why is he so appalling?

This isn’t even like John Kerry and George Bush. It’s the choice between possibility, imagination, redemption and social and financial competence, and deception, stagnation and contempt for the good sense of your citizens.

Obama has shown no imagination, nor financial competence. He has decieved time and time again, and refuses to answer questions (when they are asked) about his questionable background.



America used to stand for something enviable, something you had to go to America to get, and right now it doesn’t. It could again but it’s not going to because you’re going to elect John McCain and you’re going to fuck it all up for everybody and for the rest of us, and probably for good.

Yes, Lord Savior Barack Obama will save us all. Jesus H. Christ.



I know it’s not really “your” fault. It looks like nothing short of a revolution against your domestic sources of information and whatnot is going to be required.

It’s just that I was depressed last time but I knew things would be OK in four years because it would become so abundantly clear what a mistake had been made that it couldn’t possibly happen again and that we still had some time to save the planet, basically.

But it’s happening again, only worse this time, because John McCain’s really an older version of George Bush only with a worse temper and Barack Obama’s a far, far better candidate than John Kerry,

My point?

I’m depressed. How the fuck can this be happening?

Yes, yes. It's amazing that, living abroad, you still cling to Democratic talking points. "McCain is Bush 44!" is the narrative of the week. So spare me the mock outrage and socialist democracy talking points.

[franksargent]

His wife has big knockers?

She does?

Are they for real?

Americans want to know. :no:

[trumptman]

John McCain is going to win the election.

It’s going to be a catastrophe for America, there’s nothing that anyone can do to stop it and it’s so, so awful to watch.

I agree. I think we should adopt the Euro model whereby we have votes about the EU Constitution, ignore them and then let the agencies grab all the money and begin setting themselves up anyway. Then we should move on to letting Sharia courts be set up and enforce the rule of law. Finally as a kicker we should always ignore action in our backyard and profit from the sactions we set up.

That would be awesome.

Only Americans get to choose their President but everybody else in the world has to live with the consequences. From outside America it’s really easy to see that history's about to be thwarted, by a nation that used to guide history, and that John McCain is exactly, 100%, what that nation doesn’t need. Electing Barack Obama America could at a stroke restore its reputation in the world, restore the idea that it stands for possibility and the power of the imagination to make extraordinary changes that actually benefit its citizens, but it's not going to.

See I see the opposite. Europe is about the become Islamic while suffering a demographic implosion within their native cultures and people. Japan and China are much the same with regard to demography only worse since they enforce one child policies or are so racist they wouldn't allow immigration to attempt to solve their problems. Among all that I consider the odds of the U.S. better than most.


Outside America we can all see what an extraordinarily good candidate Obama is, and what an appalling choice John McCain is (if we could vote he would get something like 75% of the votes). This isn’t even like John Kerry and George Bush. It’s the choice between possibility, imagination, redemption and social and financial competence, and deception, stagnation and contempt for the good sense of your citizens.

Perhaps it would be good to consider the source for your information. If you keep getting bad readings, perhaps you should check the instrument taking the readings.

America used to stand for something enviable, something you had to go to America to get, and right now it doesn’t. It could again but it’s not going to because you’re going to elect John McCain and you’re going to fuck it all up for everybody and for the rest of us, and probably for good.

I'll take it over most other places. I wish we would realize that Canada can be smart enough to socialize medicine and also drill and utilize every natural resource they have available to them. Here in the U.S. a lot of good possibilities get tossed due to extremism be it environmental or societal. I'm thinking the boomers dying will take care of a good chunk of this though.


I know it’s not really “your” fault. It looks like nothing short of a revolution against your domestic sources of information and whatnot is going to be required.

It’s just that I was depressed last time but I knew things would be OK in four years because it would become so abundantly clear what a mistake had been made that it couldn’t possibly happen again and that we still had some time to save the planet, basically.

Perhaps some perspective would help with those feelings. We aren't suffering the black plague nor are we having wars across the world or continent. One of the chief complaints about wars now is how easy it has become to ignore them. That is one of my big complaints with conservatives and taxes. When 40-45% of the entire population are off the tax rolls, how can a tax increase or cut really help or scare them? Put everyone back on and watch the interest rise again.

But it’s happening again, only worse this time, because John McCain’s really an older version of George Bush only with a worse temper and Barack Obama’s a far, far better candidate than John Kerry,

My point?

I’m depressed. How the fuck can this be happening?

Perhaps you could check your conclusions. I'm not calling you a liar, but I haven't seen Obama be that great of a candidate. He plans occasional big events that get the cable news channels excited but at the end of the day he hasn't said more nor done more than a sitcom in my view. That view can be wrong, but as you note, why the constant bewilderment about why reality doesn't seem to jibe with the "facts."

Everybody seems to claim ownership of certain facts in this day and age. They spend a lot of time claiming themselves truthful and someone else a liar due to their absolute certainty about their "facts" and the belief that they are incontrovertably true. Yet reality seems to disconnect from their facts. I don't have to label them but I would ask them to re-examine why this is so.

I don't consider McCain any sort of great candidate. If he were I think he would have put Obama away long ago even given the media storm and political climate. Obama really isn't that good of a candidate either hence the muddle. McCain has strung together enough good decisions and efforts to earn my vote but that endorsement came very late and it is still the lesser of two evils for sure. I don't know for sure that he will win and certainly consider the election Obama's to still lose. Until the generic vote is closer and until the Republicans truly offer up a better platform I don't see them performing much better than they are now.

The Republicans have gotten better at launching criticisms at Democrats and the Democratic ability to nationalize criticisms is part of what helped them win in 2006. However nobody is giving off a good unifying message and plan of action that people can easily understand and support. The Republicans are almost there with energy. If they truly tossed some of the older leadership and added good budgeting back into the mix they would be back strong.

The next big events in the chain are the debates. I still suspect McCain and Palin will do better than Obama and Biden. Obama doesn't really seem to venture into areas where his viewpoints are challenged. I think that will be telling at the debates. We've all seen McCain willing to go on The View, Letterman, Ellen, CBSNews, all sort of places where his views aren't just challenged, but where he is literally confronted about them. He won't be rattled.

Palin, I think by then will still be full of energy and will have grown stronger from each interview, I mean media attack. The media enables the Democrats by protecting them, but when push really comes to shove, the Democrats can't cross the line because there is something that is gained by having to engage in the attacks. Just my view, of course and we will see how the chips fall.

[Frank777]

Obama doesn't really seem to venture into areas where his viewpoints are challenged. I think that will be telling at the debates. We've all seen McCain willing to go on The View, Letterman, Ellen, CBSNews, all sort of places where his views aren't just challenged, but where he is literally confronted about them. He won't be rattled.

Palin, I think by then will still be full of energy and will have grown stronger from each interview, I mean media attack. The media enables the Democrats by protecting them, but when push really comes to shove, the Democrats can't cross the line because there is something that is gained by having to engage in the attacks.

I'll let Hassan return fire on his own, but Nick does raise an excellent point.

Because most journalists tend to lean left on social issues, the Democrats have been sheltered in the past when hot-button moral issues are in play. This does eventually hurt them since Hollywood and media types are fundamentally at odds with many Middle American values.

It ends up taking less to knock a Democratic campaign off-stride than a Republican one, because the GOP knows going in that they have to fight harder, target their core base, and prevail against large media organizations to make their point.

This isn't really a secret. Left-wingers on this board have commented on how much "better" the Republicans do political campaigns. This is a big part of the reason why.

[addabox]

Dear internet:

The "liberal media" meme was only ever a strategy play the refs, as more than one Republican strategist has candidly attested to. The fact that some people took it to be literally true is a lamentable byproduct of an idea cooked up by people with a keener grasp of how all this works.

Any argument that proceeds from "because the liberal media" is doomed to stupidity. Any argument that prefaces that claim with "because most reporters are liberal" is simply ignorant of how journalism works.

Stupidity and ignorance, internet. Best avoided.

Regards,

Addabox

[screener]

Because most journalists tend to lean left on social issues,
I always wondered why this is the case.

Care to expound?

[jimmac]

You're right that McCain may be blamed for the meltdown on Wall Street. However, I must ask: What GOP policies contributed to this meltdown? I'm curious.

Deregulation.

I don't like big goverment anymore than the next guy but sometimes in a free society you have to have a little control otherwise sometimes things go hog wild. Deregulating the banks and encouraging them to loosen their standards are what caused them to give risky loans which later defaulted. If you put this all together with the other negative economic factors and shake well....

I was talking to a friend who's an econ professor at work and he could see this coming a mile away.

But I'm sure you'll have some rational for this. You can read the news as well as I.

[tonton]

Are you aware of the massive tax increases he is proposing...

Are you aware of the massive tax cuts he's proposing?

Ok. Let me spell it out here. Obama is cutting income taxes for 95% of Americans. Including you.

Now you may honestly believe in "trickle-down" theory but that's not what you're arguing here. You're saying Obama is raising taxes, again, rinse and repeat, just like all the other mindless Republican drones.

Obama is not raising taxes, not "massively", not "minimally". Even McCain's most senior economic adviser admits this. Yet you continue to distort, "Are you aware of the massive tax increases he is proposing..."

What is your motivation here, in repeating something that's been proven to be factually incorrect?

[tonton]

Deregulation.

I don't like big goverment anymore than the next guy but sometimes in a free society you have to have a little control otherwise sometimes things go hog wild. Deregulating the banks and encouraging them to loosen their standards are what caused them to give risky loans which later defaulted. If you put this all together with the other negative economic factors and shake well....

I was talking to a friend who's an econ professor at work and he could see this coming a mile away.

But I'm sure you'll have some rational for this. You can read the news as well as I.

Oh, but didn't you hear? The deregulation was a Democrat idea. It was a "pet project" of theirs. And the Democrats, in their typically sinister, deceptive way, managed to "trick" Republicans into proposing, and then passing, the relevant bills. Don't you see? It's all the Democrats' fault.

[SDW2001]

Deregulation.

I don't like big goverment anymore than the next guy but sometimes in a free society you have to have a little control otherwise sometimes things go hog wild. Deregulating the banks and encouraging them to loosen their standards are what caused them to give risky loans which later defaulted. If you put this all together with the other negative economic factors and shake well....

I was talking to a friend who's an econ professor at work and he could see this coming a mile away.

But I'm sure you'll have some rational for this. You can read the news as well as I.


<jimmac opens can of worms>

You'll pardon me for saying that IMHO, {personal attack removed -JL} It's like you're reading Nancy Pelosi. "Deregulation" is nothing more than a buzz word at this point, especially to those like you (no offense) that throw it around in attacking the GOP for political purposes.

The fact is that the current crisis has more to do with disorganized and needlessly complex regulation than "deregulation." Reform is needed in this area. And as to who has allowed this, it's been happening for at least 20 years. It's not one party. The mortgage industry has been allowed to relax lending standards for decades.

But regulation and/or deregulation are not the prime reasons for the meltdown, either. They are merely part of the problem. We've had a perfect storm: Widely accessible cheap credit, creative financing terms (negative amortization, teasers, etc), sub prime and less-than-prime borrowers, a huge real estate bubble, and unscrupulous mortgage bankers/investment banks.

The house of cards looked solid until the housing market inevitably blew up. Teaser rates disappeared, equity vanished and loans got called. The financial engineers created and sold products that they themselves didn't understand. Sub-prime loans were packaged with prime loans and sold as "Grade AAA" type products. This all coincided with the surge in energy prices as well.

Very little was due to "deregulation" by the GOP. Even if you say it was, what about the Democrats for the last two years? According to Pelosi, they bear no responsibility. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13514.html) OK then.

[sammi jo]

This thread, and any current discussion about Obama vs McCain and the forthcoming election are redundant, a waste of time, if the peoples' votes are not reliably counted, or not recorded in the way the voters intended, or altered by a third party, or people are intimidated/coerced into not voting, or have been illegally removed from the voter rolls, or have been tricked into thinking that they are correctly registered to vote... or any other shenanigans that have characterized the last two presidential elections.

If *ANY* of these practices are employed in this election, then the final result is meaningless. If the prospect of a bogus election isn't bothersome to people, then we might as well say "screw democracy, lets have a dictatorship or a monarchy instead". Even then, half the country wouldn't care... 50% of eligible voters don't go to the polls.. for whatever reason.

[jimmac]

<jimmac opens can of worms>

You'll pardon me for saying that IMHO, you have no idea what you're saying. It's like you're reading Nancy Pelosi. "Deregulation" is nothing more than a buzz word at this point, especially to those like you (no offense) that throw it around in attacking the GOP for political purposes.

The fact is that the current crisis has more to do with disorganized and needlessly complex regulation than "deregulation." Reform is needed in this area. And as to who has allowed this, it's been happening for at least 20 years. It's not one party. The mortgage industry has been allowed to relax lending standards for decades.

But regulation and/or deregulation are not the prime reasons for the meltdown, either. They are merely part of the problem. We've had a perfect storm: Widely accessible cheap credit, creative financing terms (negative amortization, teasers, etc), sub prime and less-than-prime borrowers, a huge real estate bubble, and unscrupulous mortgage bankers/investment banks.

The house of cards looked solid until the housing market inevitably blew up. Teaser rates disappeared, equity vanished and loans got called. The financial engineers created and sold products that they themselves didn't understand. Sub-prime loans were packaged with prime loans and sold as "Grade AAA" type products. This all coincided with the surge in energy prices as well.

Very little was due to "deregulation" by the GOP. Even if you say it was, what about the Democrats for the last two years? According to Pelosi, they bear no responsibility. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13514.html) OK then.


Like I said you'd rationalize.;)

What about the republicans in total control for 6 years before that. And how long has the republican congress been in power? Sorry Charlie but there's no way for you to wiggle out of this one. Please!:rolleyes::no:

[jimmac]

Oh, but didn't you hear? The deregulation was a Democrat idea. It was a "pet project" of theirs. And the Democrats, in their typically sinister, deceptive way, managed to "trick" Republicans into proposing, and then passing, the relevant bills. Don't you see? It's all the Democrats' fault.


:lol: Yeah!

[trumptman]

Are you aware of the massive tax cuts he's proposing?

Ok. Let me spell it out here. Obama is cutting income taxes for 95% of Americans. Including you.

Can you explain how you can cut taxes for 95% of Americans when 40-45% of Americans pay no federal income tax?

[tonton]

Can you explain how you can cut taxes for 95% of Americans when 40-45% of Americans pay no federal income tax?

Good point. Can you explain why 40-45% of Americans are so poor that their standard deductions are higher than their income?

[hardeeharhar]

Can you explain how you can cut taxes for 95% of Americans when 40-45% of Americans pay no federal income tax?
95% of working americans and Obama is proposing to do it mostly via providing tax credits to individuals and families...

Now, of course, you would know this if you actually read that link provided earlier to disprove your claims that Obama has no plan...

[trumptman]

95% of working americans and Obama is proposing to do it mostly via providing tax credits to individuals and families...

Now, of course, you would know this if you actually read that link provided earlier to disprove your claims that Obama has no plan...

You've clarified it to what I already knew. I just wanted to see Tonton clarify it since it has been repeated several times this way by him.(not mentioning the work requirement)

Of course I'm pretty sure that if a Republican proposed a tax cut of a $1000 to someone earning $249,000 while giving nothing to someone who is not working, not paying taxes and is already poor, we would call that a tax cut for the rich.:D;)

I'm glad to know it isn't anymore.:p

BTW is there any reason why as a Californian, I can't pronounce the A in American when I talk?

[tonton]

You've clarified it to what I already knew. I just wanted to see Tonton clarify it since it has been repeated several times this way by him.(not mentioning the work requirement)

Of course I'm pretty sure that if a Republican proposed a tax cut of a $1000 to someone earning $249,000 while giving nothing to someone who is not working, not paying taxes and is already poor, we would call that a tax cut for the rich.:D;)

I'm glad to know it isn't anymore.:p

BTW is there any reason why as a Californian, I can't pronounce the A in American when I talk?

I've already said you had a good point, and I'll correct my usage of the phrase accordingly.

[hardeeharhar]

You've clarified it to what I already knew. I just wanted to see Tonton clarify it since it has been repeated several times this way by him.(not mentioning the work requirement)

Of course I'm pretty sure that if a Republican proposed a tax cut of a $1000 to someone earning $249,000 while giving nothing to someone who is not working, not paying taxes and is already poor, we would call that a tax cut for the rich.:D;)

I'm glad to know it isn't anymore.:p

BTW is there any reason why as a Californian, I can't pronounce the A in American when I talk?
I am not sure.

Maybe that's just the way I hear it...

Btw, were you actually insulted by my now deleted post? I am just not sure how it constituted an ad hom...

[midwinter]

I am not sure.

Maybe that's just the way I hear it...

Btw, were you actually insulted by my now deleted post? I am just not sure how it constituted an ad hom...

Didn't you suggest that anyone with a brain could see X and that you were pretty sure that Nick had a brain even though he couldn't see X so it must mean that his wife was withholding sex? That's pretty much an ad hom. It was a (bad) joke, but it was an ad hom.

[icfireball]

He can't promise you that unless he's the CEO of Diebold (Premier Election Solutions)...

If McCain manages to keep the election within the "margin of error" (so to speak, I'm not talking about specific numbers here) by election day, stealing the election would be possible.

The two bits of solace Obama has regarding election fraud are:
1. Obama may have enough swing states that don't have the same potential for fraud to win the election without those trigger states like Florida and Ohio.
2. Although Diebold creates, owns, maintains, and has complete control over the voting machines, and that the leadership at Diebold is conservative, I'd venture to guess the smartest technical minds in the country are mostly liberal... Perhaps there will be some kind of counter action... fighting fire with fire. You get into exceedingly dangerous territory there though.

[trumptman]

I am not sure.

Maybe that's just the way I hear it...

Btw, were you actually insulted by my now deleted post? I am just not sure how it constituted an ad hom...

PM sent.

[Mystic]

Vote for Obama (http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/907/1/147/)

[Outsider]

Vote for Obama (http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/907/1/147/)
Yeah and the KKK endorses (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/13/153951/214/376/497964) McCain. I'd take the Communist Party endorsement any day of the week over the KKK's. As if it even mattered. There's always going to be some extreme wacko organization supporting someone for president.

Fucking ridiculous.

[Mystic]

Yeah and the KKK endorses (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/13/153951/214/376/497964) McCain. I'd take the Communist Party endorsement any day of the week over the KKK's. As if it even mattered. There's always going to be some extreme wacko organization supporting someone for president.

Fucking ridiculous.

It matters when that "extreme wacko" organizations views mirror a political parties platform.

[BRussell]

It matters when that "extreme wacko" organizations views mirror a political parties platform. Oh come on now, the KKK isn't that similar to the Republican party.

[Mystic]

Oh come on now, the KKK isn't that similar to the Republican party.

That's my point... Can the Democrats say the same thing of the CPUSA?

[FormerLurker]

Vote for Obama (http://www.cpusa.org/article/articleview/907/1/147/)
Gee, that's funny..... they usually endorse the Republican candidate, don't they?

In other news, the John Birch Society is, shockingly, NOT endorsing Obama.

[addabox]

sigh...

[@_@ Artman]

http://gays4mccain.com/ (http://gays4mccain.com/)

not that there's anything wrong with that...

[screener]

http://gays4mccain.com/ (http://gays4mccain.com/)

not that there's anything wrong with that...
Makes less sense to me than Hillary supporters being for McCain.

[Bergermeister]

"Would you like to go to church with me on Sunday...?"

[icfireball]

Obama has nothing to gain by going on Fox News.*

*Notwithstanding his secret agreement with Murdoch to go on O'Reilly in exchange for...?

Actually... Murdoch has expressed a modicum of support for Obama.

[Bergermeister]

Reposted in the How Low Can He Go thread.

[Mystic]

http://gays4mccain.com/ (http://gays4mccain.com/)

not that there's anything wrong with that...

You keep giving examples of Supporters who do NOT mirror the Republicans platform. Surely you can do better.
Let me help you here is the Republican Platform (http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf) .

[Bergermeister]

What exactly is the Republican platform? It seems to be changing every day.

[Mystic]

What exactly is the Republican platform? It seems to be changing every day.
I posted a link to it. Put your mouse over the highlighted text and click, Then read the text. Here it is again along with all the others...
Republican Platform (http://platform.gop.com/2008Platform.pdf)
Democrat Platform (http://www.workinglife.org/storage/users/4/4/images/111/2008%20democratic%20platform%20080808.pdf)
Libertarian Party Platform (http://www.lp.org/platform)
Communist Party PLatform (http://www.cpusa.org/filemanager/download/55/CPUSAProgramWEB.pdf)

[@_@ Artman]

Oh, now I get it.

I could give you a great recipe for a tasty dish, but there is a very good chance one might get a little creative and add or subtract things to suit their (or their family's) tastes.

Unfortunately, that's how platforms are and have become and have changed over the years. Their supporters too.

Also, can't you take a joke?

[screener]

Also, can't you take a joke?
So sad.

[@_@ Artman]

So sad.

Please explain yourself.

[@_@ Artman]

Please explain yourself.

Sorry, I think I know whom you are talking about...:rolleyes: it's been a rough week.

[@_@ Artman]

You think you know who you were talking about!

Hope I dont have your kind of rough week :D

EEK! I replied to myself. I'm becoming McCain! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPyKpcivQYQ)

:err::wow::no:

[screener]

I always find it sad when someone can't take a joke, laugh at themselves.

For the record, I didn't know who you meant, but sad nonetheless.

[@_@ Artman]

I always find it sad when someone can't take a joke, laugh at themselves.

For the record, I didn't know who you meant, but sad nonetheless.

Whoa dude, I have really been walking on eggshells since returning, so bare with me.

The whole course the thread took there was fairly obvious. :err:

[screener]

Whoa dude, I have really been walking on eggshells since returning, so bare with me.

The whole course the thread took there was fairly obvious. :err:
This wasn't meant for you, meant for whoever couldn't take a joke, generically.