I think the intelligence thing has a lot to do with it. I also don't think the McCain camp did Palin any favors in the way they presented her from the start of the campaign. She got off on the wrong foot and wasn't able to recover. I think that image will fade with time (after all, there are lots of people who forget the Dukakis campaign, i.e. the worst-run campaign ever).

And I think that most of us are too undisciplined to really be bothered when our communities benefit from federal money.

Am I really going to go protest my county taking more money for the local schools that might flow through the stimulus but isn't a legit federal function to me? Probably not.

Again this goes to that sense of entitlement I mentioned previously. Why should I apologize when it's not MY fault someone misread my post? On the flip side, why can't they say, "well DeepImpact, I'm not really sure I understand what you mean. Could you clarify the point you are trying to illustrate?" Why does it have to be, "what you are saying doesn't make sense. You're so stupid. What you said was so stupid. Oh these 1L's. blah blah blah."

And no I don't think people are pming each other. I think they just repeat what they see others saying instead of having independent thoughts. And some people deliberately misinterpret what I say. The fact that it was stated that I turned people off from my first thread indicates a certain prejudice towards anything I say.

With respect to your comment about me picking and choosing which posts I respond to, don't we all? None of respond to EVERY single post in a thread.

Was it how THEY presented her, or how she presented herself?

I think it's a mixture of both but the McCain campaign did hang her out to dry.

Ultimately, because they chose her as his running-mate, it was their responsibility to ensure that she was well prepared for every interview and that the toe the line as far as what to say and what not to say.

Obama's people even had trouble with Biden, but it didn't seem like they had as much trouble as McCain's people.

Since when is a call for self-reflection stupid? You can't sit here and say you are perfect and have never gone too far around here.

But thanks for proving exactly what we have been saying.

1.) How can someone ask for clarification when they don't know that they're misinterpreting a post?

2.) No one says, "What you are saying doesn't make sense." And no one has called you stupid, so don't even go there. Poeple simply react to what you say. You then get mad and drag things out, instead of simply saying, “I’m sorry, what I meant was...” Other people here do it, why can't you?

3.) You're now saying that we don't have independent thoughts, and everyone here just copies everyone else? I think you should have just admitted to believing that everyone is PMing each other.

4.) I just find it interesting that you choose to ignore the posts that you do.

I'm not trying to revive a discussion on Palin, honestly, especially now when it's not particularly topical. I will just be interested in seeing how issues that were used against her are de-emphasized with other candidates in 2012. I really don't expect her to be in it. I'll open that thread in summer of 2012.

I'm not trying to say that anyone who wants to talk about Palin can't, of course. I'm just not that interested in going down that path today.

Jindal came to mind with his consideration of turning down some of the stimulus money, and it's hard not to see that as a national stage move. He intrigues me. I won't have any problem that I know of voting for him if he ends up the GOP candidate and yes I kind of expect to vote for the GOP candidate. But his popularity with people who will claim to want to break with the evangelicals or loosen up on social issues is interesting. I don't know if you or Munchkin are in that camp or not.

Sometimes I get the feeling they prepped her but she ended up trying to do her own thing.

On what may be a random note, I actually felt sorry for Palin at times. Mind you I didn't care for her as a VP pick. What I didn't like about the way the McCain campaign handled her was that they never really meant for her to be a true partner. I think they wanted someone who was young and attractive and who would fade into the spotlight and not be in the way.

To get on my favorite horse, I'd chalk this up to the role the media played. Sure, Biden was old news or whatever KSigkid told me to explain it. But surely Cheney is too now, and I still read more about his nefarious schemes to get Libby a pardon than I do about Biden.

What's Joe been up to? Anyone know?

This is funny, considering the mob mentality comment earlier.

*goes back to spectating*

I don't think anyone really picks a VP as a true partner. They pick to complement strengths and weaknesses, but not for an equal run.

Didn't you say a previous post in the simulated conversation with me that someone will say that something I said doesn't make sense? Now you are saying that isn't the case? Which one is it? Make up your mind.


And again, no one on here responds to every post. It's not "ignoring." Sometimes people just don't feel like responding to certain posts.

Have you responded to EVERY single post in this thread? I hope you have based on your attitude about the matter.

Unfortunately it cost them votes. I was planning on voting for McCain before the hijinks that ensued after the GOP convention.

Not to say that went for all of his voters, however. Many voted for McCain because of Palin. Many voted for McCain in spite of Palin.

Regardless, there's another thread about this topic.

Ultimately, since the stimulus bill has passed, we'll have to wait and see what the effects are. I wouldn't call this the Great Depression, but who knows where we'll bottom out if we haven't already.

I do know it's ridiculously hard to find a job right now.

I mean someone who they expect to have an active role. Obama expects Biden to have an active role. I think the McCain campaign just wanted to use Palin to get to the White House and then I think they were going to try to keep her out of the way and shut her up, leaving her out of key decisions that would normally involve the VP.

He shows up on Pundit Kitchen like every other day.

The man needs to stop making crazy faces.

ETA:

Found Him. Apparently ordering penis-enlarging pills. :D

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress...ple-enzyte.jpg

It's interesting hearing your point of view on the matter. I know some people who were going to vote for McCain but changed their mind when Palin was selected. I can't even imagine what McCain must be feeling right now. I'm sure he's kicking himself. They picked Palin to get the female vote, Obama didn't do the same, and now he's the one in the White House.

That sounds like letting capitalism crumble so that we can give rise to socialism (or the, much better approach, combination of capitalism and socialism). In other words, what will happen after the crumble?

What the American Dream is varies based on status groups. But people are afraid of the uncertainty and whether the structure can keep us from an "every man and woman for him and herself" mentality. Where are the social safety nets? Many states are struggling with 10% unemployment, what would they do with 50% unemployment?

That's the long and short of it. There's much more to it.

Really? What is it?

I think Obama expects to have Biden's input on major decisions. Obama doesn't strike me as the type to just ignore his VP and leave him out in the cold the way I think McCain would have done Palin.

If they picked her for the female vote they failed miserably.

It's debatable why he picked her. Many think it was an effort to consolidate the conservative republican base, since oftentimes McCain is characterized as too moderate or liberal. I would think this is more likely.

If that is the case then they didn't fail as miserably as they did if they picked her for the female vote.

After all, it's not like this was a landslide election for Obama. It was a pretty hard fought battle. So to say that Palin hurt McCain that badly would mean the same as saying that McCain would have had the election in the bag had he not picked Palin.

I'm not saying that. I'm just saying that in my case, Palin tipped it. Not so for live-in, he was always an Obama supporter. Also not so for a lot of the people I know who would traditionally vote republican who voted for Obama this year.

My dad's been a republican for 40 years. This was his first time voting for a Democrat. I can tell you he didn't give a flying fig about Sarah Palin, or Joe Biden for that matter.

Do we? I think we know he's smart, young, non-white and Republican. But I bet most people don't know anything about Louisiana policy under Jindal.

I meant to respond to this earlier.

I don't think it's about giving attention. Perhaps people are trying to bridge differences. Ever think about that? I would like to think that at least.

So his role boils down to your assessment of Obama's character?

I think it's too early to know the role that Biden will have in Obama's administration. He very well could put his foot in his mouth (again) and be pushed to the background.

I also think we'll never really know the role that Sarah Palin would have played in McCain's administration, had there been one. For those of us who didn't vote for McCain because of Palin, it's that unknown that was the tipping point. Not because we thought she was hotter than us.

I bet 40-some Palin is hotter than lil 20-some me. But I've got youth on my side. ;)

Besides talk about the stimulus bill? I guess you're right.

Many people speculated that he brought Palin on board as a way of pulling in the Hillary Clinton supporters once she did not win the nomination.
As much as I like Obama, deep down I think McCain would have won if he had chosen Mitt Romney, or even that other female Republican (sorry, can't remember her name right now..I think she may be a governor).

I'm curious though as to what made your dad change? I know you said he didn't give a flying fig about Palin...so was that his main reasoning?

I’m sorry, my simulated conversation was just a general statement. People don’t say you don’t make sense, they basically react to something you say that is wrong, extreme, or different from their opinion. For example... ‘Wrong’ would be when people thought you said no one could visit the White House, and someone posted a link to White House tours. ‘Different from their opinion’ would be when everyone thought you were justifying physically taking a hat off of someone’s head, and people thought that wasn’t the right thing to do. Again, sorry.. I MISSPOKE.

I never said that you have to respond to every post. I said... what I find interesting is which posts you choose to ignore. Speaking of which, I’m still curious as to who is in this mob...

It's funny to see "complete heresy" thrown out there because I think of "heresy" as a term Catholics like to throw around and Catholics are cool with Darwin. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/com...cle5705331.ece

At least today, long after the theory is completely accepted scientifically.. .

lol Why are you curious? :) (no sarcasm with this smiley face)

On my dad, besides the actual issues and who lined up where with his changing views (retirement really has changed him a lot!), he thought McCain was A. Too old, and B. Looked like a pervy old man. LOL.

If female voters really went over to McCain when he chose Palin, that shows that those female voters really don't care about the issues. At all. Because Palin and Clinton are on starkly opposite ends of the political spectrum.

And anyone with half a brain who cares to look can see that.

I'm telling you, political commentators are often not worth their salt. McCain's people are not that stupid, and they don't think voters are that stupid. More likely, it was because she's conservative. The fact that she had a vagina and is hot were a plus.

Maybe

I think it's a combination of the two. People were operating under the mistaken assumption that McCain wasn't conservative, so the party was trying to fight that popular assumption...Palin was vocal enough on the socially conservative issues that the far-right base would embrace her.

If he was just looking for a woman, as I've said before on the board, I would have rather it had been Kay Hutchison. Her economic policies would have worked with the "base," but she probably would have been considered too liberal socially (as she's spoken out in favor of Roe, and to some people, the social discussion begins and ends with abortion). Plus, she's in her mid-to-late 60s, and I think McCain wanted someone more youthful on the ticket.

I disagreed with too many of Obama's policies to consider voting for him, but the Palin choice was extremely disappointing to me. I'm hoping that in the next 2 years (before mid-term elections) and next 4 years (before the Presidential election), the party is able to re-group.

LMAO at pervy old man. I didn't think he looked like a perv. I just thought he looked...embalmed.

I got sick of hearing about Palin fulfilling the "naughty librarian" stereotype for some men. As in she takes her hair down, shakes it, removes the glasses, and gives a BJ in the library stacks. :rolleyes:

Oh, I'm not calling anyone else out on their lack of deep Jindal knowledge. I don't claim to be an expert myself. Any hard look at Louisiana politics just makes me want to re-read All the King's Men.

I just occasionally peruse some sites that occasionally track and condemn his claims about faith and science.

While I'm not really in favor of capitalism from an ethical standpoint, that's what we have in this country. If we want to be capitalists, we should let capitalism do its job which means weak businesses go under while strong businesses merge to create mega powers.

After the crumble, we'll have an upswing as we always do. What we're doing now mirrors what we did in reaction to the Great Depression. We pumped tax payer money into the economy and extended the depression all the way into WWII. That's not to say that the war ended the depression. I'm just highlighting that the Great Depression lasted at least the twelve years from 1929-1941.

We're not even in a full-on depression yet and we've already got two enormous stimulus packages plus the latest mortgage bailout nonsense that Obama is working on now. I understand where he's coming from and why he's doing it, but I don't think it's the right move.

I just figured you could enlighten us.

I'm by no means an economist or economic scholar, but it seems like you're equating the US system with more of a pure capitalism, a laissez-faire system. I don't know that that's completely accurate.

The "Great Depression" is a tough comp, because I don't think anyone really knows how much FDR's social programs helped. I think a lot more credit has to be given to WWII and the business that came out of that. But, that's getting into my "FDR is Overrated" kick...

It isn't accurate. This is not a pure capitalist system.

I don't think the social programs worked to right the economy; however, they did drastically improve our quality of life.