Who will be the next President of the United States?

[Sailor Steve]

I find it interesting when people point to the Republicans as bad guys in campaigning this way. It's true, they do it, and they're wrong to do it, but President Bush said he would disavow any involvement with the Swift Boat guys if Kerry would deny any connection with MoveOn.org, and Kerry never responded.

The Republicans did deny a connection, and I won't argue that they weren't lying, because at the very least they were glad it happened; but the Democrats actually had a link to MoveOn.org posted at their official website, and the MoveOn guys were just as bad or worse with their mud-slinging. Anybody remember the ads with Bush as Hitler?

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

The term has come to mean character smearing, what a mod here would call ad hominem, focusing on irrelevant or relatively unimportant issues, usually cosmetics of patriotism.

If that is what 'swiftboating" means ... I would not call this article swiftboating, but just the opposite.

It is important for the truth to be spoken to obtain the office of the President of the United States. They can lie after they get in the oval office, not before ...

I really hope and pray this is a lie: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...r_tortured.htm

It is commonly accepted that McCain was treated better than other POW's and afforded medical care immediately after the North Vietnamese discovered that his father was a top admiral.

Several Vietnam veterans groups do solely exist to expose McCain's abandonment of veteran's interests as well as his lies about being tortured, including Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain and U.S. Veteran Dispatch.

Doubts over McCain's alleged war hero status and his support to curtail efforts to look for missing POW's contributed to torpedoing his presidential campaign in 2000 and those same questions will undoubtedly surface again should the Senator win the Republican nomination.

[NEON DEON]

Part of Obama statement from Huffington:

"The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation."


Wright talking to the NY Times:

"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me," Wright told The New York Times with a shrug. "I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen."

Obama lies. Obama would not have to distance himself from Wright unless he knew what wright espoused.

[August]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Most of the original stuff was concerning John Kerry's Vietnam record, notable because of it's connections with the Bush 04 campaign, and the shaky foundations of the claims.

From - here

The term has come to mean character smearing, what a mod here would call ad hominem, focusing on irrelevant or relatively unimportant issues, usually cosmetics of patriotism.

The term is a great way to cast doubt on something without actually confronting it.

If you're looking for secret motivations though this might be it:

Mr. O'Neill said he "would be thrilled to look at anything he wants to send." Still, he added, "I'm sorry he never apologized for his 1971 speech," referring to Mr. Kerry's testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in which he told other soldiers' accounts of ravaging Vietnamese villages and citizens. "I think it would have been a very positive thing to do in terms of the many thousands of people who survived Vietnam and felt that was very hurtful."

[TDK1044]

Looking at the math here, Obama currently has a lead of just under 140 delegates. Even allowing for Hillary victories in the remaining States, with the Democratic proportional allocation system of delegates, Obama will still have a very healthy lead over her at the end of the process....though not enough to cross the winning line. The Super Delegates will then decide it, and at least 50 percent of those will vote for Obama.

So then we go to a presidential race with McCain and Obama. The Pastor issue will certainly hurt Obama a lot, but a growing number of Americans are becoming increasingly frustrated with a 'no exit strategy' from the Republicans, and the fact that we are entering an economic slow down will also not help the republicans in November. It may not be their fault, but perception is often as important as reality.

I think the most significant issue this time will be the number of people voting. When George Bush beat John Kerry, he was ahead by about 4 percent in the popular vote. The number of people voting in the Republican primaries has been about the same as 2004, but the Democratic demographic has changed big time because of Obama. The number of people voting in Democratic primaries is the highest in recorded history.

So, we get to choose between a 'business as usual' old fart who should be enjoying his grand children, or a black JFK wannabe with little experience. It should be fun.

[geetrue]

Originally Posted by TDK1044

The number of people voting in the Republican primaries has been about the same as 2004, but the Democratic demographic has changed big time because of Obama. The number of people voting in Democratic primaries is the highest in recorded history.

So, we get to choose between a 'business as usual' old fart who should be enjoying his grand children, or a black JFK wannabe with little experience. It should be fun.

At least we get to chose, uh? Better than putting up with Putin's choice to run his country.

The numbers of people voting in the primaries is higher than normal for the democrats for sure.

In years past when the young people got behind a canidate for president they didn't show up at the polls and the other side won.

If money makes a difference Obama has been breaking all records on that too.

The real boon doggle is the leaders of the pack in the democratic race have tied themselves up with each other, leaving very little time to confront the republicans.

[dean_acheson]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Most of the original stuff was concerning John Kerry's Vietnam record, notable because of it's connections with the Bush 04 campaign, and the shaky foundations of the claims.

From - here

The term has come to mean character smearing, what a mod here would call ad hominem, focusing on irrelevant or relatively unimportant issues, usually cosmetics of patriotism.

Well, I hate to say this, and I guess in the world we live in, nothing is non-partisan, but legitmate questions were raised about Mr. Kerry's record, and his commendations, and how he got them. The New York Times, with his horrible record of 'sources' doesn't cite dates and such in this article, but 'records' that it doesn't cite.

Mr. Kerry created this mess with his own decisions. Mainly of which were to:

1.) That Gawd-awful speech in front of the foreign relations committe accusing his fellow former troops as killers.

2.) Teaming up with the Winter Soldier crowd.

3.) Basing his 2004 run on being a 'real hero' and George W. Bush as a chickenhawk.

So, I find to agree to use the term "swiftboat" as simply a synonym for an ad homoniem attack is something that I simply don't agree with, since it implies that raising questions about somebody is an attack without reason, which it wasn't.

Many of those who served in and around Kerry, or in the same unit after he left made a decision not to support the idea of him as a commander in chief. For those on the left, esp. Kerry, to claim that these veterans kept him out of the White House is simply sour apples from a fellow and a party that ran an absolutly incompetent race.

[dean_acheson]

Originally Posted by NEON DEON

Part of Obama statement from Huffington:

"The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation."


Wright talking to the NY Times:

"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me," Wright told The New York Times with a shrug. "I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen."

Obama lies. Obama would not have to distance himself from Wright unless he knew what wright espoused.

The amazing thing about the BHO and his campaign is after all the spin control they chose the HuffPo to post this piece, and under BHO's own name! Wow.

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by dean_acheson

Well, I hate to say this, and I guess in the world we live in, nothing is non-partisan, but legitmate questions were raised about Mr. Kerry's record, and his commendations, and how he got them.

Indeed there were questions about his record, especially involving conflicting statements from his CO, Elliott I think the name was. What was remarkable about the SwiftBoat group was the almost unanimous falsehood of their claims, and their total funding from a small group of texas Republicans.

The New York Times, with his horrible record of 'sources' doesn't cite dates and such in this article, but 'records' that it doesn't cite.

I picked that quote out because it sums up how I saw the SwiftBoat groups campaign. Wasn't really digging for proofs/conslusions

So, I find to agree to use the term "swiftboat" as simply a synonym for an ad homoniem attack is something that I simply don't agree with, since it implies that raising questions about somebody is an attack without reason, which it wasn't.

Yeah, Kerry did himself no favours by mentioning his wartime service, he was already somewhat controversial for VVAW etc.
The SwiftBoat guys were not without motive or reason, but they lacked credibility, corroboration and honesty in many of their statements.

Many of those who served in and around Kerry, or in the same unit after he left made a decision not to support the idea of him as a commander in chief. For those on the left, esp. Kerry, to claim that these veterans kept him out of the White House is simply sour apples from a fellow and a party that ran an absolutly incompetent race.

Aye, that campaign was horrendous. He should have declared his candidacy and then gone fishing. The more people saw of him, the less they liked.
I'd be wary of underestimating the effect of the group. Very often it's not what somebody answers, it's the nature of the questions they have to answer.
Look at the mess that led to headlines about Obama's patriotism. i remember headlines that ended with "Is he exposed?".

[dean_acheson]

Well crap, now that Tchocky and I agree on everything on that, what do we do now?

Oh, I know. Juan Williams giving the haymaker hook to BHO..... ouch! From the voice of NPR no less.....


http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/1...boom-on-obama/

[NEON DEON]

I spent a lot of time on the democratic party websites today reading the blogs.

It is like watching a cat chase his tail.

The only time Mc gets mentioned is when someone declares he will be voting for him if Obama is the Democratic Nominee. The division is widening.

It is like watching a train wreck. I cant take my eyes off of it

All you republicans out there who want to vote for Hillary in an open primary because she is the weakest competition, be my guest.

[geetrue]

I left the numbers off, because they don't really matter ... look at the dates.

Both democrats will be using up time on each other giving amunition to Senator McCain in the process.

Here are the states left and I think Puerto Rico has 53 delegates voting last in June.


April 5:
Virgin Islands caucuses

April 22:
Pennsylvania primaries



May 3:
Guam caucuses

May 6:
Indiana primaries


North Carolina primaries

May 13:
Nebraska primary


West Virginia primary

May 18:
Hawaii convention

May 20:
Kentucky primaries


Oregon primaries

May 27:
Idaho primary

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by dean_acheson

Well crap, now that Tchocky and I agree on everything on that, what do we do now?

Agreement Party!

[TDK1044]

The Democrats are always their own worst enemy...it's amusing to watch them.

The problem the Republicans will face in November is that our economy will be hurting bad by then, and historically the swing voters, who usually end up deciding who gets to be President, will to some degree blame the Republicans who have been in office for the last eight years. It doesn't matter who inaccurate that assesment may be, when gas hits $4 per gallon and the price of groceries goes up, it's going to be the Republicans fault in the eyes of many.

Add to that the fact that a lot of Republicans have little time for John McCain, and we'll have an interesting contest on our hands.

[Sea Demon]

Originally Posted by TDK1044

The Democrats are always their own worst enemy...it's amusing to watch them.

It is amusing to watch them destroy themselves and their party. It couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch.

The problem the Republicans will face in November is that our economy will be hurting bad by then, and historically the swing voters, who usually end up deciding who gets to be President, will to some degree blame the Republicans who have been in office for the last eight years. It doesn't matter who inaccurate that assesment may be, when gas hits $4 per gallon and the price of groceries goes up, it's going to be the Republicans fault in the eyes of many.

Add to that the fact that a lot of Republicans have little time for John McCain, and we'll have an interesting contest on our hands.

True. People do see these things as the fault of whoever is on top. Bush can't control the price of groceries or oil commodities, yet he and Republicans will get the blame. Bush does sign the Congress's budget, so yeah, he can take the blame there. It's a shame that the Republican nominee is such a weak Republican.

I just got home from a little vacation, and have been watching this side of it with some angst. If McCain loses, he will lose because he won't be able to provide new ideas or seperate himself from current policy initiatives that are perceived to be part of his own agenda. In addition, he needs to drive the national security issue down the throats of any fence sitters thinking about voting for either of the two Dem nominees.