The first of four debates will happen tonight--3 between Obama and McCain, and 1 between Palin and Biden. I would encourage everyone to listen to or watch the debates. There is a lot at stake in any Presidential election, but I feel like this one is particularly important for so many crucial issues, and I am looking forward to what both men have to say.

Feel free to discuss the debates here. This thread might end up getting merged with the Decision '08 thread depending how the discussion goes, but I thought evaluating the debates themselves might be a separate enough topic.

McCain has said he will be in Oxford, MS tonight after all for the debate after suspending his campaign temporarily a few days ago to help work on the bill that's getting hammered out to deal with the financial crisis. While Obama had stated he'd be at the debate, he had also suspended his campaigning to help out on this crisis, and he has resumed his campaign as well.

While Obama had stated he'd be at the debate, he had also suspended his campaigning to help out on this crisis, and he has resumed his campaign as well.Could you please tell me where you heard this? I've been following the news pretty closely and this is the first I'm hearing of this.

Could you please tell me where you heard this? I've been following the news pretty closely and this is the first I'm hearing of this.
I'd seen on the news he'd gone back to Washington and had canceled planned appearances to work on Capitol hill just as McCain had--it was described on the news as 'suspending his campaign'. Could just be a case of semantics in that case.

I think that was certainly a political move on both their parts, but I think at the same time Washington needed both men to be there to work on this--in November one of them is going to be elected President and one of them is still going to be a Senator, and both will still have roles in this financial mess. They both need to have a solid understanding of what's happening, and being in Washington while major legislation is being hammered out was essential for them in terms of knowledge and making sure their constituency is appropriately represented.

Ok, so Obama didn't make an announcement that he was suspending his campaign? Got it.

That assertion struck me as a little odd considering that I saw him making television appearances, etc. Thanks for clarifying.

EDIT: In all fairness, we saw McCain doing those things too, however he did say that he was suspending his campaign (apparently for 48 hours).

Ok, so Obama didn't make an announcement that he was suspending his campaign? Got it.No official statement from Obama on that, to my knowledge. I suppose they could have said he canceled appearances to work on this stuff instead of suspending his campaign. Oh well.

EDIT: In all fairness, we saw McCain doing those things too, however he did say that he was suspending his campaign (apparently for 48 hours).Totally not a surprise to see posturing in a presidential campaign. :D

I'd love to hear what everyone's favorite quotes of the debate are, points that stuck out for you as particularly effective or ineffective, things the candidates did well or poorly, what candidates answered particularly well, etc. It's easy to find the gaffes, but I'd also like to see the positives and places were the arguments were well done.

This is the worst debate ever so far. They keep just talking into the camera.

I want to see blood in their eyes as they tear apart each other's policy.

If John McCain is so good at working at cutting spending why didn’t he do that when the Republican had control of Congress and the Presidency?

I believe he needs to remove his rose color glasses, they don’t suite his former maverick status and the American people are not that stupid. Well maybe they are not that stupid.:(

I see that McCain is practicing his Sidious Snicker in this debate. I'm also noticing that McCain keeps beating 'round da Bush in several of his questions. This debate has been pretty boring so far, but I have my hopes for the VP debate; I can't wait for Palin to expose herself as a witch.

This is the worst debate ever so far. They keep just talking into the camera.

I want to see blood in their eyes as they tear apart each other's policy.

Quote for truth. This debate is extraordinarily boring and, as mentioned, I'm eager for the VP Debate. I really want to see Biden rip Palin to shreds. But that might be wishful thinking on my part. :p

We talk and give money to Pakistani where Al Qaeda is, but threaten Iran.

Makes perfect sense to me. :nut:

Very good points by Obama about who is at fault for embolden Iran.

The debate sounded like it heated up for a moment. Currently, Obama and McCain are on the topic of Iran and unconditionally speaking with its leader(s). I wonder if the Middle East is viewed as a major (issue) anymore? Or has the economic crisis taken precedence?

Is McCain so stupid? Why does his answer to every question include Iraq?

Senator, would you like cream with your coffee?
McCain: Well when I was in Iraq…

It is like he is trying to lose the election.

McCain is too use to talking in sound bites. We just heard Obama say the surge worked, but according to McCain Obama never said that. Is McCain saying I’m stupid or deaf?

Interesting debate--I was expecting some kind killer comment that defined this debate and it never really happened. I enjoyed that both men had a spirited exchange but were still civil to each other. There were moments when both men were on the offensive, both on the defensive. Obama clearly won the domestic aspects, I think, and his plan of tax cuts for the middle class is going to be undeniably popular. McCain did not refute Obama's points that McCain would cut taxes on the wealthiest and put a tax on healthcare. Obama did not hem and haw and take a long time to get to his answer as he had in some other debates. He got to the point more quickly with his answers tonight, and he really needed to do that. I agreed with what I heard from Obama on healthcare, though I missed the first section of the debate and part of that discussion, unfortunately. McCain clearly won the foreign side of the debate--his emphasis on where he's traveled and leaders he's spoken with only highlighted Obama's inexperience. He was far more knowledgeable on the military, as I expected from a military man.

McCain needed a clear win in this debate and I don't know if he got that. Obama needed only to come to a draw, and I think he achieved at least that.

I think Charles Krauthammer's comment about each camp's response after the debate was priceless: "It reminds me of the headline in the Harvard Crimson--'Harvard beats Yale 29-29!'"

If John McCain is so good at working at cutting spending why didn’t he do that when the Republican had control of Congress and the Presidency?

I believe he needs to remove his rose color glasses, they don’t suite his former maverick status and the American people are not that stupid. Well maybe they are not that stupid.:(QFE

I did watch tonights debate, and I found it quite interesting. I really don't know all that much on politics and whatnot but one major thing that I picked up on was that Obama said, along the lines of, we need someone in office that nows how to use the military. Along those lines. I don't know the exact quotes, but if you too watched the debate you should probably know what I am talking about. Back to what I was saying, who do you think would handle the military better, someone who was in the military or someone who has not been in the military. Those we the exact words out of my mouth at the time that Obama said that.

It is evident that John McCain has a lot more military knowledge and a lot more experiance than Obama. That is one of the things that I picked up during this specific debate.

Another thing that I think that I should bring up, or one of the things that I thought really, is Obama's thinking on what he think should happen if we knew that Bin Laden and high ranking leaders of Al-Qaeda were in Pakistan or some other middle eastern country. I believe that he said that he would attack them. I don't quite remember if he said whether or not if he had permission by that country or not. If not, would that not put us at risk of going into another war?? Remember, I am no expert at these things....;)

I do have to say that Obama is a very good speaker. However, my personal opinion is that McCain was stronger tonight.

Please do correct me if I am inaccurate with anything that I have said. Please...

who do you think would handle the military better, someone who was in the military or someone who has not been in the military.
In my personal opinion, the one that will handle the military the best is the one that will use the military as last resort and not as the first option.

I believe Franklin Delano Roosevelt had no military experience yet oversaw the country in a successful war effort.

Again, my personal opinion, I would rather have someone that listened to the commanders on the ground rather than have military experience that prevents them from seeing reality of what is happening on the ground. Saying everything is safe when you are surrounded by 100 troops is not exactly the reality of the war zone.

In my personal opinion, the one that will handle the military the best is the one that will use the military as last resort and not as the first option.

I believe Franklin Delano Roosevelt had no military experience yet oversaw the country in a successful war effort.

Again, my personal opinion, I would rather have someone that listened to the commanders on the ground rather than have military experience that prevents them from seeing reality of what is happening on the ground. Saying everything is safe when you are surrounded by 100 troops is not exactly the reality of the war zone.
I do agree with you in most respects. And this really does heavily rely on your opinion.

You see, you could say that it has been proven that presidents with no military experiance can win a war, but they are two different people, with two different beliefs. They are not going to be the same.

Does not McCain listen to what the commanders on the ground say? He praised Gen. Petraeus numerous times during tonights debate on his tactics.

Well, IMO, I would much rather have someone that has had military experiance to accurately use the military over someone that hasn't. Experiance...

Yes, he praised Gen. Petraeus, but he also said Iraq was safe before the surge. I really don’t consider praising the General a reason to vote for McCain.

Your right about FDR and Obama being two different people and no military experience does not guarantee military success or failure, but neither does military experience. Look at the Korean War both Harry Truman and Dwight D Eisenhower had military experience or look at the Vietnam War both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon had military experience.

If a president that greatly help ensure victory as a General in World War could not succeed in Korea, I really cannot see how a Captain in Vietnam will guarantee victory in Iraq or more important (IMO) in fighting Al-Qaeda.

At least Obama seems to remember the enemy that attacked us 09/11/2001 was Al-Qaeda and not Iraq.

Not to nitpick, but I don't really see how the United States lost the Korean War. It wasn't a victory, but I don't see how it was a defeat.

Not to nitpick, but I don't really see how the United States lost the Korean War. It wasn't a victory, but I don't see how it was a defeat.
Not to nitpick, but where did I say we lost the Korean War?

I wrote it was a failure and not a defeat. If Iraq ends, the same way I will considered it a failure too. What else can you call a war that ended in not peace, but with a 55-year-old cease-fire? A cease-fire that is so frail that it still requires American troops to defend foreign soil to this day.

There is no dishonor in retreating from a war such as in the middle east... The war cost is hurting the economy, and it's making everyone pretty mad at us. Besides, I don't think (this part is opinion -> ) that the middle east is an effective place to take on these terrorists. Islam is everywhere... I really don't have anything against what people beleive anymore, since I'm now moderately libertarian, but seriously, if you look at the statistics of Islam's effects as it gains popularity in countries; and the arguments against Islam, it would be better if Islam as a religion didn't exist... Now I don't have anything against these people's beleiving this- but the effects it has are not positive in any way for anyone. Child abuse, suicide, violations of women's rights, encouragement to hate and attempt to murder (homicide) your fellow human if he/she beleives anything else...

I'd continue on that, but I'd be straying to far off topic.
IMHO, we need to pull out from the middle east and increase our homeland defenses, whilst still trying to get the new world-wide arms race to end.

The thing that really stuck out for me during this debate was Obama going: "Uh, ah, ooh, eh" when he was thinking... but I really don't know why.

But, as for who's going to use the Military more responsibly, I'd say McCain, if only because he served in the Air Force as an Officer, and he was the son of an Admiral. I'm not trying to say that he's going to have all the skills of an Admiral, but one would think that he'd have learned something from his father...

Your right about FDR and Obama being two different people and no military experience does not guarantee military success or failure, but neither does military experience. Look at the Korean War both Harry Truman and Dwight D Eisenhower had military experience or look at the Vietnam War both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon had military experience.

If a president that greatly help ensure victory as a General in World War [2] could not succeed in Korea,

Well, Vietnam was very political, we really didn't want to tick them off... even though we were at war...

Korea, we really weren't into it... not only that, but we never fought to Win. we jst fought to keep the Status Quo in place...

Both of those Wars were mismanaged and the wrong people were kept in charge... we've changed that in Iraq and, hopefully, we'll be able to actually Win this...

... or not...

This is the worst debate ever so far. They keep just talking into the camera.

I want to see blood in their eyes as they tear apart each other's policy. I'm with you on that one. I was looking for some sort of TKO. There were moments where I said, "Come on! Take those gloves off and start hitting!" McCain did throw the most jabs and punches, but he didn't deliver any bloody noses.

My opinion -- (<--- We are taught to just say what we mean, so I'm just going to leave that phrase out for now on.)

Obama looked like he was squirming. McCain's refusal to look at him was all strategic. Obama likes being at the center of attention, and he gets comfort in giving lectures. McCain just played on Obama's inability to become comfortable. I keep hearing that Obama had won more points, but the debate didn't seem to come off that way. Obama looked more like a follower than a leader. McCain's experience really did shine. I feel more confort in knowing that he may become our president. Obama seemed to be caught off guard, for he didn't have any actual experiences to fall back upon.

What I can't figure out is, why Obama on a good day cannot beat McCain on a bad day. McCain wasn't really at his best, and the debate still felt 50/50. Obama did have a better ending, but that doesn't mean much overall.

We have two more debates, and the presidency is still up in the air. I cannot believe that we are still split 50/50.

Is McCain so stupid? Why does his answer to every question include Iraq?

Senator, would you like cream with your coffee?
McCain: Well when I was in Iraq…

It is like he is trying to lose the election.

McCain is too use to talking in sound bites. We just heard Obama say the surge worked, but according to McCain Obama never said that. Is McCain saying I’m stupid or deaf? Did we see the same debate? Iraq was no doubt in the forefront. You can't leave out Iraq when talking about foriegn policy. Iraq and Afghanistan are now one war. If we were talking about this three to four years ago, I can see how people may believe they are two different wars. Our enemy is fighting on two grounds.

Obama originally said at press confrences that the surge wouldn't work. McCain was just pointing out Obama's sudden change in support.

Obama's campaign was all about how McCain was a reflection of Bush. After watching the debate last night, Obama and McCain are more alike on certain issues. Experience is going to be the major difference for fifty percent of the voters. Last night was a reminder of how much more experience McCain has.

McCain had ideas, experiences, and historical details. Obama had ideas.

There is no dishonor in retreating from a war such as in the middle east... The war cost is hurting the economy, and it's making everyone pretty mad at us. Besides, I don't think (this part is opinion -> ) that the middle east is an effective place to take on these terrorists. Islam is everywhere... I really don't have anything against what people beleive anymore, since I'm now moderately libertarian, but seriously, if you look at the statistics of Islam's effects as it gains popularity in countries; and the arguments against Islam, it would be better if Islam as a religion didn't exist... Now I don't have anything against these people's beleiving this- but the effects it has are not positive in any way for anyone. Child abuse, suicide, violations of women's rights, encouragement to hate and attempt to murder (homicide) your fellow human if he/she beleives anything else...

I'd continue on that, but I'd be straying to far off topic.
IMHO, we need to pull out from the middle east and increase our homeland defenses, whilst still trying to get the new world-wide arms race to end.
It sounds to me like you are being ethnocentric, Arc. Islam is everywhere, but lets look at the facts (http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-religion-map.htm). I don't think that you should be bashing Islam like that. Yeah, I myself don't agree with it, but Islam itself isn't violent. It is the extremists that are. Not all muslims are extreme, guys....just had to say that. :)

I am definately looking forward to the other debates...

But, as for who's going to use the Military more responsibly, I'd say McCain, if only because he served in the Air Force as an Officer, and he was the son of an Admiral. I'm not trying to say that he's going to have all the skills of an Admiral, but one would think that he'd have learned something from his father...

As I keep saying, simply being in the military isn't enough to lead a war. Yes, he may have some expert knowledge about the military - but War doesn't just involve the military.

There's the politicians, the economic side of things, the diplomatic side, and the general public to consider as well with war.

He may have knowledge of a few of these things, but it doesn't necessarily mean he can lead a war.

But then again, that doesn't make Obama the right person either.

As i've said in another thread, we don't know how effective a President either of them will be until they are actually in the Oval Office.

As I keep saying, simply being in the military isn't enough to lead a war. Yes, he may have some expert knowledge about the military - but War doesn't just involve the military.

There's the politicians, the economic side of things, the diplomatic side, and the general public to consider as well with war.

I don't think that you quite understand the question. Who would use the military better.

There are more sides to war, on the homefront mostly, but war is war on the frontlines.

As i've said in another thread, we don't know how effective a President either of them will be until they are actually in the Oval Office. You have a point there. We have hired some with and without military experience, and everything has turned out alright. However, we are in a different world. Military tactics and strategies are important more now than ever. We need someone who can use diplomacy and war when necessary. Negotiating with the enemy without preconditions is a waste of time. McCain understands that all too well.

I don't think that you quite understand the question. Who would use the military better.
There are more sides to war, on the homefront mostly, but war is war on the frontlines. McCain's experiences in war will make him flexible. Being in a war that was considered unpopular gives McCain a unique perspective. He will be sympathetic to the men and women on the ground, and McCain will know how to use tact for a responsible resolve.

I don't think that you quite understand the question. Who would use the military better.

There are more sides to war, on the homefront mostly, but war is war on the frontlines.

Oh no, I understood it perfectly. :)

My point still stands - the candidate's experiences (or lack of) of the military doesn't mean they know how to use it better.

The question should really be do either of them have the wisdom to use it better?

McCain had training at the Naval Academy in Annapolis and was a commissioned officer from 1958 to 1981 when he retired. He was a fighter pilot for a number of years. He attended the National War college and commanded a squadron in addition to serving as the Navy's liaison to the Senate. As squadron Commander he improved safety and readiness to the point where the squadron got a meritorious unit commendation. If he had not made improvements I could see where his ability to use the military might be in question, but that's not the case. There's no question that McCain understands the military's ins and outs far better than Obama ever will, since Obama has not served in the military. I am not saying Obama can't learn, but he cannot match 23 years of military experience.

So since my Uncle was an officer in the navy does that mean he can be president too?

So since my Uncle was an officer in the navy does that mean he can be president too?

Does he meet the requirements set forth by the Constitution? :xp:

Seriously, I realize that while McCain was tied to the military for a significant portion of his life, that does not, in of itself, make him fit to lead a nation. As Jae said, McCain may understand the military better than Obama, but that doesn't mean that McCain is any more fit to lead the nation than Obama. It just means that one was in the military, and one wasn't.

Yes he does. My point is I don't see how it's really all that relevant. Being in the military certainly gives you an insight, but unless you're something equivalent to a 4-star General you don't have the experience to claim you know everything about how the military works on the large scale.

Sure, he was a Captain. That doesn't make him any more qualified to be president than Obama. Or my uncle.

Yes he does. My point is I don't see how it's really all that relevant. Being in the military certainly gives you an insight, but unless you're something equivalent to a 4-star General you don't have the experience to claim you know everything about how the military works on the large scale.

Sure, he was a Captain. That doesn't make him any more qualified to be president than Obama. Or my uncle.

Which is what I said. :p

Sure, he was a Captain. That doesn't make him any more qualified to be president than Obama. Or my uncle.

That's exactly what i've been trying to get at. Sure, he commanded a squadron. But that Squadron is just one aspect of a Military comprised of three different elements (Army, Navy and Air Force).

Which still isn't enough for anyone to effectively gauge who would be the better option.

So since my Uncle was an officer in the navy does that mean he can be president too?

The question was who could use the military best, Obama or McCain, and experience in the military is going to give McCain a substantial advantage in that particular department. I can't speak to your uncle's military experience and how it would affect his ability to serve as President, and it's irrelevant to the conversation anyway.

Arcesious and Astor--the topic is the debate, not Islam--please discuss Islam in the appropriate thread(s). Thanks.

The Palin - Biden debate should prove to be even more interesting than the Mccain - Obama one was...

I'm sorry, if Palin is getting her butt consistently handed to her in softball interviews, she's going to get eaten alive by Biden.

I'm sorry, if Palin is getting her butt consistently handed to her in softball interviews, she's going to get eaten alive by Biden. After last night's debate between McCain and Barrack, I think everyone will be stepping up the defences. I don't call Palin out yet. It doesn't look good, but I wouldn't count her out.

The Palin - Biden debate should prove to be even more interesting than the Mccain - Obama one was...
Judging from Palin's interview by Katie Couric it should prove at least entertaining... :nutz3:

I can't believe there is a possibility this person could one day have access to the Nuclear Football..."oh...what does this button do?" :xp:


* D3 goes back to watching the Canadian political circus*

I'm sorry, if Palin is getting her butt consistently handed to her in softball interviews, she's going to get eaten alive by Biden.
I hope she does. I mean no disrespect to Palin (well, maybe a little), but unless you can handle the 'baptism by fire,' I'm not sure you've got the guts to lead the country.

I'm sorry, if Palin is getting her butt consistently handed to her in softball interviews, she's going to get eaten alive by Biden.

In every interview i've seen, she's avoided all the questions, with vague answers or answers that don't make sense - being able to see the Russian Coast is apparently important when considering the Georgia Situation, after all.

And that interview she did the other day was just as bad. I've never seen Biden in an interview, but if he can at least answer questions in a clear way, then Palin's sunk.

Did we see the same debate? Iraq was no doubt in the forefront. You can't leave out Iraq when talking about foriegn policy. When you are running for President under your party’s banner and the incumbent President stated a unpopular war, you do not bring it up every 5 seconds if you want to win the election. McCain still seems to be under the impression that the American people believe the Iraq War was a good idea. Iraq and Afghanistan are now one war. I disagree, the war in Afghanistan is a war fighting those that attacked us on 9/11/2001. The war in Iraq is our own creation. It started as a giant Easter egg hunt where there were no hidden eggs and has turned into a quagmire. Who really believes when we pull the surge back the Shia and Sunni people are going to suddenly start acting like long lost brothers? Probably only the same people that thought the Iraqi people would welcome us like liberators instead of invaders. Obama originally said at press confrences that the surge wouldn't work. McCain was just pointing out Obama's sudden change in support. Yes Obama did, but at the debate Obama also stated the surge worked. Yet, McCain said he had not admitted that even though everyone that watched the debate knows Obama did (with the expectation of those wearing the ever popular Republican rose color glasses). Last night was a reminder of how much more experience McCain has. As my 73 mother pointed out to me the debate did point out John McCain’s experience. It also pointed out to her his age. With the inexperience of his running mate, McCain’s age worries her. Since John McCain is only one year my Mother’s junior she has a real issue with his age considering his running mate. So yes, I believe experience will be a factor, but I believe how that translates into votes depends of the voters perspective. If John McCain would have picked a running mate with experience he could have locked up the experience issue, yet he did not.

So my original point stands, is McCain trying to lose the election? He has the experience and expertise (not counting his apparent lack of knowledge on the difference being the different Muslims) in foreign affairs, yet he continually reminds the American people of his support of an unpopular war. He has the experience to be commander and chief, yet he picks a running mate with very little experience.

So my original point stands, is McCain trying to lose the election? He has the experience and expertise (not counting his apparent lack of knowledge on the difference being the different Muslims) in foreign affairs, yet he continually reminds the American people of his support of an unpopular war. He has the experience to be commander and chief, yet he picks a running mate with very little experience.

While it may appear that way, I believe that McCain seriously believed that choosing Palin would help him. Perhaps he thought that she would siphon off angry Hillary voters? By any standard that's an unsure, unstable path. I guess we'll see the extent of McCain's choice at the upcoming debate.

Again, I think McCain took an unwarranted risk, and we'll see what it'll cost him.

McCain still seems to be under the impression that the American people believe the Iraq War was a good idea.Meh. I understand what he's doing, but I don't agree with it.

I'm probably reading more into this than what should be considered "normal", but I think it's important to focus on the underlying narrative of each candidate's position. McCain's narrative is that American's aren't quitters (and if you vote for the other guy, then you're saying that we are. See: false dichotomy). Republicans are very good at tapping into these messages (see: yellow ribbons, American flag pins, jingoism, etc).

So does McCain know deep down in his heart that the war is unpopular. I'd like to think that he's smart enough that the answer would be yes. So why continue to bring it up? Because (if you notice) when he talks about the war, he doesn't talk about the war: he advertises the narrative (not accepting defeat, defending democracy, etc). Next time you see McCain confronted about Iraq, watch how quickly he runs and hides behind his talking points (and refuses to come out). One of those fun little things that once you notice it, it's pretty obvious.

McCain still seems to be under the impression that the American people believe the Iraq War was a good idea. Watch the polls. Aproximately 50% do agree with the Iraq war. I may not agree with the original intell, but I absolutely agree that it was the right thing to do.

Why are people ignoring the polls? McCain and Barrack are only seperated by the margin of error. Estimated 50% for McCain and 50% for Barrack.

While it may appear that way, I believe that McCain seriously believed that choosing Palin would help him. Perhaps he thought that she would siphon off angry Hillary voters? By any standard that's an unsure, unstable path. I guess we'll see the extent of McCain's choice at the upcoming debate.

Again, I think McCain took an unwarranted risk, and we'll see what it'll cost him.

I think he picked her for several reasons.
a. Female, when the Dems rejected Clinton as even VP.
b. From an oil state
c. Conservative to appeal to that side of the party.
d. She's not Romney, who McCain clearly could not stand.
e. She apparently doesn't have serious skeletons in her closet.
f. She can speak in front of crowds articulately. TV is a very different matter, obviously--she clearly has a difficult time with that.

Seeing what she's done on TV lately, I think Biden is going to win the debate, unless she really pulls herself together and Biden says something really stupid.

a. Female, when the Dems rejected Clinton as even VP."The Dems" didn't reject her. Obama did.
e. She apparently doesn't have serious skeletons in her closet.Trooper-gate?
f. She can speak in front of crowds articulately. TV is a very different matter, obviously--she clearly has a difficult time with that. No teleprompter in interviews :dozey:

I think he picked her for several reasons.
a. Female, when the Dems rejected Clinton as even VP.
b. From an oil state
c. Conservative to appeal to that side of the party.
d. She's not Romney, who McCain clearly could not stand.
e. She apparently doesn't have serious skeletons in her closet.
f. She can speak in front of crowds articulately. TV is a very different matter, obviously--she clearly has a difficult time with that.
g. MILF.

Fixed. :D

And, yes, it is relevant to this discussion as it was most likely a factor in his choosing her. ;)

I think he picked her for several reasons.
a. Female, when the Dems rejected Clinton as even VP.
b. From an oil state
c. Conservative to appeal to that side of the party.
d. She's not Romney, who McCain clearly could not stand.
e. She apparently doesn't have serious skeletons in her closet.
f. She can speak in front of crowds articulately. TV is a very different matter, obviously--she clearly has a difficult time with that.
g. Milf.
h. Milf.
i. Milf.
j. Milf.
k. Milf.
l. Milf.
m. Milf.
n. Milf.
o. Milf.
p. Milf.
q. Milf.
r. Milf.
s. Milf.
t. Milf.
u. Milf.
v. Milf.
w. Milf.
x Milf.
y. Foreign experience with numerous exotic lands, in particular Idaho.
z. Milf.


Fixed for emphasis.

Watch the polls. Aproximately 50% do agree with the Iraq war. I may not agree with the original intell, but I absolutely agree that it was the right thing to do.

Why are people ignoring the polls? McCain and Barrack are only seperated by the margin of error. Estimated 50% for McCain and 50% for Barrack. Why are people ignoring the polls?

According to the latest poll number taken by CBS/New York Time 09/21/2008 – 09/24/2008 when asked: "Looking back, do you think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq, or should the U.S. have stayed out?"

39% said it was the “Right Thing”

55% said we should of “Stayed Out.”

6% said they were “Unsure.”

Call me old fashion, but when I was in school 21 years of my life, 55 was a bigger number than 39. Thing may have change, but I’d still rather have 55 dollars than 39 dollars. :D

As to the Presidential polls, I see a relative unknown African-American, first term Senator with 50% of the vote while John McCain, an American hero and senior Senator, with only 44% of the vote. 6 points is beyond the margin of error and a huge lead in a country so divided. I also see that the poll number have widen since the debate. Again, IMO these numbers have nothing to do with McCain and everything to do with President Bush and the fact he is a Republican. It is an economic issue. It is still an eternity of time in a campaign, but unless McCain distances himself from the current administration, I do not see him winning. Bush’s job rating was 66% disapproval as of 09/23/2008.

...and Biden says something really stupid.
This, if Biden’s past history is any indication, is highly probable, of course Palin saying something stupid will not shock me either.