NationStates Jolt Archive

I posted this in the ongoing election thread, but since that's a thread of current issues, I thought I might make it here. If it's redundant and election issues should stay in the one election thread, feel free to merge mods.

But rather than focus on the election to come, I wanted this post to focus on what I see are the four main areas that shifted this to what we have now, Obama's election to lose. So, without further ado, my four mistakes of John McCain:

Political momentum is a strange thing. As you get popular, you get more media coverage, your message gets out there more, which attracts new supporters, which causes even a greater lead. Undecided voters look at your growing lead and think "hey, if all those people prefer him, they MUST be on to something" and the cycle continues.

As I think about it, I can come up with 4 things that have shifted things in Obama's favor that McCain had counted on to work for him. Four key tactics in McCain's strategy that failed.

1. The Long Democratic Primary Season

What McCain wanted: This was the first thing that McCain was banking on. Once he secured the Republican nomination, he tried to use his position to garner support among independents, while the Democrats were still trying to find their leader. He hoped that as long as the infighting continued with Democrats, he was in a better position to get his message out.

What actually happened: A few things stopped this from going in McCain's favor. First, to their credit, a lot of democrats and independents reserved judgment until a party leader was picked, they simply waited and didn't make up their mind until they knew the picture, this stopped McCain's strategy of picking up early support. Second, a lot of democrats and left leaning independents looked at the records and positions of McCain, Clinton, and Obama and decided that, whichever democrat won, he or she would be better than McCain. In other words, many decided, early on, whoever was the democratic nominee, they wouldn't be voting for John McCain. Sure, there was some swapping (Clinton supporters for McCain for example) but it wasn't the bulk of it. Third, once McCain secured the nomination, media coverage of him pretty much stopped, as the news focused on the ongoing Democratic primary. Nobody was paying attention to him as everyone watched Obama and Clinton talk. This allowed a lot of people who were either unsure or unfamiliar with Obama to really learn about him, and learn his policies. Obama had the disadvantage of being a relative political unknown, and the longer primary season kept people focused on him. Fourth, the long primary season and Clinton's dirty campaign got the smear tactics over with and out of the way. Although McCain is trying it now, Rev. Wright is old news, we've heard about it already. We've already integrated that knowledge into our political stances. Pointing it out again isn't changing our position. By playing rough with Obama, Clinton helped immunize him against similar attacks by McCain. We've heard it all, it's nothing new.

2. Sarah Palin

What McCain wanted:The convention "bump" is well documented. McCain's strategy was to ride that bump as long as possible, build momentum, and ride the wave to the white house. And to do that, he picked Sarah Palin, someone he hoped would keep the base gallvinized long enough to build a significant lead against Obama. And while it did, temporarily, get him a 1 point advantage, and it looked like his strategy would work, it didn't last.

What actually happened: Palin ate her tie. A lot of that political momentum was turned around when the discussion shifted to just how unbelievably bad Palin was. When even your supporters start talking about your poor judgment, that throws a wrench in your momentum. Likewise, when the discussion starts talking about how likely you are to die in office, and leave your incompetent lackey in charge, this isn't anything good for you. Even though Palin managed to slightly turn it around with her so-so and people were left feeling OK about her, they felt better about Joe Biden. She lost that momentum so badly that she needed to knock it out of the park to get it back, and she failed to do that. She may have done well enough to stop a continual downslide in support and pick up her numbers a bit, by then it was too late, the Obama train was picking up speed, and she didn't do enough to stop it.

3. The Campaign Suspension

What McCain wanted: McCain pulled a political gamble suspending his campaign. He hoped that the american public would have admired his leadership, and force Obama to do one of two things, either suspend his own campaign in response, thus pulling himself out of the spotlight, derailing his momentum, or refuse to do so, and thus allow McCain to attack him for his loss of leadership. Either Obama follows suit, or McCain can isolate him and attack him.

What actually happened: Obama handled it beautifully, basically standing up and saying he would continue to campaign, would continue to debate, and he'd do it and STILL be a senator, doing his job to help the financial crisis. He managed to turn McCain's attempt to back him in the corner into a way for him to argue that if McCain couldn't do two things at once, he was unfit to be President. At which point, it looked like McCain's strategy had failed, he would not be able to attack Obama, and, if he went through with his promise to suspend the campaign, not only would he appear to be incapable of multitasking, and thus unworthy of the presidency, it would also turn the scheduled debate into a free, 90 minute, nation wide commercial for Barack Obama. Thus, within the space of two days, he went from "I will not debate until a deal has reached" to "OK, I'll debate" as the deal fell through. This caused people to either see him as someone who would abandon his integrity once it became inconvenient for him, or as someone who concocted this entire ploy for political gain, and his suspension was never in the best interest of the nation, but in the best interest of John McCain. Thus a move to frame him as the presidential type instead was masterfully swapped into making OBAMA look more presidential, and he lost credibility when he backed out of his original statement within 48 hours.

4. The Debate

What McCain wanted: At that point, McCain was still the favored candidate in foreign policy concerns. An entire debate focused entirely on his area of expertise would allow him to win the debate, make himself appear to be the smarter candidate, and further push he momentum he was hoping to get through points 1-3. He was hoping by the time the debate rolled around, he'd already have a lead, and use this debate to slam it home, so that by the time the other debates occurred, his lead would be insurmountable, even if he lost to Obama in domestic issues.

What actually happened: The debate organizers realized how idiotic it would be to have the first time America hears both candidates speak at the same time, and have them spend the entire time talking about Iraq when the economy was falling to pieces. The organizers though, probably quite justifiably, that the first presidential debate should focus, at least to some extent, on the major issues that were happening at that very moment. This turned half the debate into a debate on the economy, and on to Obama's home turf. This allowed him to dominate the first half of the debate, and while he did suffer a bit in the foreign policy section, this turned what should have been a knock out for McCain into, at best, a push.

Im glad you reposted this in its own thread. It was an excellent read, and spot on. 110% correct.

four? You can come with just four? You're being awfully generous there, Neo.

Wait for it, the Four Horsemen of McCain's Campaign Apocalypse have come, so we all know that Hell will follow shortly.

On another note, I've recently been turned on to the Four Horsemen full Whiskey, with Hell Following as a drink to truly drink your troubles away. That damn B!#$@...

four? You can come with just four? You're being awfully generous there, Neo.

Palin surely counts as 2, perhaps 2.5...

I think your analysis is pretty much spot-on, especially with regards to McCain's campaign suspension. I do wonder, however, if those mistakes look any different to truly undecided voters. The truth is, 99% of the people I talk to about politics knew which candidate they were going to vote for (or against) months ago, and so I struggle to understand the mindset of someone who is still making up her mind.

Nicely done, NA. I also think you're being generous in listing only four mistakes, but your analysis of these four is spot-on.

2, 3 and 4, yeah, I can call mistakes. 1, I wouldn't call a mistake...more a misfortune for the candidate.

Nicely done, NA. I also think you're being generous in listing only four mistakes, but your analysis of these four is spot-on.

Minor mistakes in a campaign are easially fixed and tend to have little impact. To be fair, so far, McCain has only mad 4 MAJOR mistakes.

If there is one Neo is missing, its his consistant blantant lying and inability to defend these lies, as well as the unbelievably sleezy campaign he is running.

His fifth will be his new "everything including the kitchen sink" slanders

2, 3 and 4, yeah, I can call mistakes. 1, I wouldn't call a mistake...more a misfortune for the candidate.

I call it a mistake insofar as he didn't do more to keep himself in the spotlight and the public consciousness while it was ongoing.

I need to bookmark this

Minor mistakes in a campaign are easially fixed and tend to have little impact. To be fair, so far, McCain has only mad 4 MAJOR mistakes.

If there is one Neo is missing, its his consistant blantant lying and inability to defend these lies, as well as the unbelievably sleezy campaign he is running.

His fifth will be his new "everything including the kitchen sink" slanders

I only include mistakes that I can see as having a verifiable damaging effect to his campaign, either hurting his standing, or failing to stop Obama from gaining ground. While I think the new advertisement campaign is sleazy, underhanded and dishonorable, it's too new to see whether it will hurt him or not.

I have to agree that part one isn't a mistake, though his reaction to it could be considered one.

If it's redundant and election issues should stay in the one election thread, feel free to merge mods.
SW33T! I've always wanted to try that! Hmm, what would a merge between Kat and Fris produce? :tongue:;)

I think your analysis is pretty much spot-on

your analysis of these four is spot-on.

Get out of my brain!

I call it a mistake insofar as he didn't do more to keep himself in the spotlight and the public consciousness while it was ongoing.

Fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiine...I gues it can count as such...

...but how would you keep him in the spotlight? Make him do cartwheels on the stage?

2, 3 and 4, yeah, I can call mistakes. 1, I wouldn't call a mistake...more a misfortune for the candidate.

It was more how he handled it ... he let them duke it out without keeping himself in the public eye ... in the end the fight itself brought Obama to the forefront of the peoples attention while he just kind of sat there

It was more how he handled it ... he let them duke it out without keeping himself in the public eye ... in the end the fight itself brought Obama to the forefront of the peoples attention while he just kind of sat there

this was more what I was going for, but wasn't very clear. It seemed his strategy was to keep his distance, and let the focus be on the Clinton/Obama drama. It seemed he wanted the appearance of the wise republican staying above the fray, while the democrats battled it out like children.

What actually happened was that, as a result of not pushing for more attention on him, people only heard about Obama's win after win after win, turning a relative unknown into a political powerhouse.

During all of which, the name John McCain barely got mentioned at all.

I have to agree that part one isn't a mistake, though his reaction to it could be considered one.


SW33T! I've always wanted to try that! Hmm, what would a merge between Kat and Fris produce? :tongue:;)

It might be cool if merging them created "Kris", but I'm not sure I'd want to deal with the consequences of it creating "Frat".

We'll of course have to see if tonight's debate requires amending this list.

Turning the Straight-Talk-Express into the Shit-Talk-Express, McCain has lost all respect.

I still don't understand why it's called "suspending" your campaign when you still run ads, still attack through surrogates, and still continue to operate as a campaign.

I still don't understand why it's called "suspending" your campaign when you still run ads, still attack through surrogates, and still continue to operate as a campaign.

McCain doesn't trust Americans to know the meanings of words, it seems.

I still don't understand why it's called "suspending" your campaign when you still run ads, still attack through surrogates, and still continue to operate as a campaign.

John McCain was a POW! How dare you question anything he says?!

You know, he spent a couple of years without a campaign to suspend. The gooks (his word, not mine) wouldn't let him. Why don't you think of that the next time you say something negative about him?

Commie.

McCain doesn't trust Americans to know the meanings of words, it seems.

No, John McCain is just a Maverick. He's taking on the Good Ole Boys in the Dictionary business. Words can mean whatever he wants them to. What are you going to say next, that "fundamental" and "worker" are not synonyms?!

Terrorist. I bet you have an Arab middle name like Senator "I hate freedom" Obama.

What would America be without all you liberals to laugh at?

I still don't understand why it's called "suspending" your campaign when you still run ads, still attack through surrogates, and still continue to operate as a campaign.

It is because that's what McCain says it is, and that's what he wanted people to believe it was. Just yesterday, McCain said:

I guess he [Obama] believes if a lie is big enough and repeated often enough it will be believed.

Or my favorite:

"Now is not the time to affix the blame. It's time to fix the problem. I would hope that all our leaders, all of them, can put aside short-term political goals and do what's in the best interests of the American people."

It was an utter farce of a call for political level-headedness. The very sentence before McCain uttered those words, he lambasted "Senator Obama and his allies in Congress" for infusing "unnecessary partisanship into the process."


As someone else said, McCain is assuming (or hoping) that you don't understand the English language, and that you have a very short attention span. So short that you won't notice him contradicting himself, or notice how he is often guilty of the accusations he levels against Obama. Then again, maybe it's just that HE doesn't have a solid grasp on the language or a decent attention span.

Sources: http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/mccain_obama_liar/2008/10/06/137884.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/29/mccains-mixed-messages_n_130376.html

No, John McCain is just a Maverick. He's taking on the Good Ole Boys in the Dictionary business. Words can mean whatever he wants them to. What are you going to say next, that "fundamental" and "worker" are not synonyms?!

Terrorist. I bet you have an Arab middle name like Senator "I hate freedom" Obama.

Actually, Spanish and Portuguese. Brazilian here. But... The Iberian Peninsula WAS dominated by the Moors, that became THE ARABS!!! :eek2::eek2::eek2::eek2::eek2:

What would America be without all you liberals to laugh at?

I'm sure the fact that we're obliterating McCain must be very funny to you as a conservative.

I'm just not sure why.

Nor do I care.

What would America be without all you liberals to laugh at?

well, fortunately for the sake of your amusement, you're going to have a lot of laughing to do for the next 4 years, what with a democrat controlled presidency, congress, and supreme court, and all.

I still don't understand why it's called "suspending" your campaign when you still run ads, still attack through surrogates, and still continue to operate as a campaign.

like the Obama's camp did when Obama suspened his campaign?

"suspending [your] campaign" only meant they won't go out and personally kiss ass for your votes. their comittees, friends, proxies, adds, etc will still go on.

well, fortunately for the sake of your amusement, you're going to have a lot of laughing to do for the next 4 years, what with a democrat controlled presidency, congress, and supreme court, and all.

I respect you for reasons such as this post. ;)

well, fortunately for the sake of your amusement, you're going to have a lot of laughing to do for the next 4 years, what with a democrat controlled presidency, congress, and supreme court, and all.

Unfortunately, you're probably right!
Communism is indeed on the march!

Actually, Spanish and Portuguese. Brazilian here. But... The Iberian Peninsula WAS dominated by the Moors, that became THE ARABS!!! :eek2::eek2::eek2::eek2::eek2:

You and your elitist "history." True Americans know what really happened is that God created the world, then Jesus came to convert all the Arabs to Christianity, founded America, (FUCK YEAH!) and now Barack Obama (THE ANTI CHRIST!!!) is trying to destroy America by converting us to Muslimism because that's what his racist Christian Pastor tells him to do.

It's all true, I saw it on Hannity.

I'm sure the fact that we're obliterating McCain must be very funny to you as a conservative.

I'm just not sure why.

Nor do I care.

Looks like you're somewhere at about Step 7.

Unfortunately, you're probably right!
Communism is indeed on the march!

Don't worry, God will just rapture all of us Good Christian Americans before communism takes over, so it will be okay.

Don't worry, God will just rapture all of us Good Christian Americans before communism takes over, so it will be okay.

But not before November!

Be afraid of Obama, Americans! Be very afraid!

But not before November!

Be afraid of Obama, Americans! Be very afraid!

Yes, be afraid! He might even give you socialized healthcare! :eek2:

What's next, socialized fire departments? :eek2::eek:

I fear for the future of our nation.

well, fortunately for the sake of your amusement, you're going to have a lot of laughing to do for the next 4 years, what with a democrat controlled presidency, congress, and supreme court, and all.

Ehh....yea, how well did that worked out from 2001-2004...or was it 2006....

Personally I love it when one party controls one branch, and another party controls the other. More often than not, it puts the whole thing into a gridlock, they can't get any business done, and my life is peachy because 1. it shows just how inept our government is and 2. Because the government is limited in a gridlock, the chances of them passing a spending bill, or a bill similar to The Patriot Act or Wiretapping bill decreases.

But not before November!

Be afraid of Obama, Americans! Be very afraid!

Why! Will something bad happen! Will all the punctuation at the ends of our sentences turn into exclamation points! Oh, the humanity!

....and we now have government control of the banking system.....also transportation and communications. Silly liberals don't see that they've given all their liberties away.....and they THINK THAT'S OK!!!

Unfortunately, you're probably right!
Communism is indeed on the march!

Wow. I bet you wish you knew what "communism" actually means besides "a buzzword I choose to use to attack my opponents because I can't argue better than that" right now, don't you?

....and we now have government control of the banking system.....also transportation and communications. Silly liberals don't see that they've given all their liberties away.....and they THINK THAT'S OK!!!

You mean like those liberties we were told we had to give away to the conservatives to keep us safe from the terrorists!!!

....and we now have government control of the banking system.....also transportation and communications. Silly liberals don't see that they've given all their liberties away.....and they THINK THAT'S OK!!!

And now they're trying to take away our liberties to ban gay people from marriage! When will they have destroyed enough freedom? When will they finally be satisfied?!

....and we now have government control of the banking system.....also transportation and communications. Silly liberals don't see that they've given all their liberties away.....and they THINK THAT'S OK!!!

Can't tell if this is satire or not.

I will say this, liberals do tend to think that life should be fair....ha....poor delusional idiots.

Here (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13504705) is what I said back in early March:

McCain has these four threats on the horizon:

The economy, which will continue to suck and, while unlikely to slide into any severe recession, is likely to suck worse as the year goes on. In particular, the annual summer spike in gas prices is going to be into the $4.50 or maybe $5 range, given the recent oil market. This has absolutely zero to do with McCain, but the people always punish the party in power when the economy goes south.

Iraq, despite being in a lull now, with the "surge" troops clamping down on things, is going to have some explosions again when the "surge" ends. And it will end: we cannot keep sending more troops over there, because we don't have any more. It was never supposed to last more than a year anyway, but the idea was that this would buy time for the Iraqi politicians to get their act together, and they totally failed to do so. So, as the troop levels go down, the violence is going to go back up, very bad for a pro-war candidate.

His running mate: as has been pointed out by pantless_hero, his likely choice of a conservative will drive away a lot of people; if he makes a more radical choice like Condi or whoever, then the Limbaugh-type conservatives will just stay home or make third-party noises. He can't help but alienate a block of people on one side or the other.

Himself: he's old, and already looks tired, often. He will get a much-needed break these next couple months, but in the fall look for him to get grumpy and display ill-advised flashes of temper when the strain of campaigning wears on him.
So: OK, I was wrong about Iraq becoming a major problem again. Otherwise I think I nailed it.

....and we now have government control of the banking system.....also transportation and communications. Silly liberals don't see that they've given all their liberties away.....and they THINK THAT'S OK!!!

Conservatives created the Patriot Act, which takes away more liberties than anything.

And if you believe the notion of "public" anything is communism... Boy... You are not worthy of my concern!

And if you believe the notion of "public" anything is communism... Boy... You are not worthy of my concern!

Yet you concern yourself with him regardless. Why is that?

Conservatives created the Patriot Act, which takes away more liberties than anything.

And if you believe the notion of "public" anything is communism... Boy... You are not worthy of my concern!

I will agree with you on that. I mean most companies that have stocks are "public" Does that mean they are commies?!

Can't tell if this is satire or not.

I will say this, liberals do tend to think that life should be fair....ha....poor delusional idiots.

Indeed. Trying to make progress towards a goal that cannot be completely obtained is so delusional, and everybody who tries is an idiot.

I think we should randomly pull people to the side and shoot them, even if they've done nothing wrong.

Liberals will protest that it's not fair to shoot people who have done nothing wrong, but life isn't fair!

I know his first mistake:

He was born. *nod*

Conservatives created the Patriot Act, which takes away more liberties than anything.

And if you believe the notion of "public" anything is communism... Boy... You are not worthy of my concern!

Here's a news flash. I don't want or need your concern.....but you need to educate yourself better and not be so ignorant of the truth. Keep watching CNN and PMSNBC. They'll surely teach you alot.

Yet you concern yourself with him regardless. Why is that?

It's sort of the speech made by characters that are kicking someone's ass. They don't stop, but...

Indeed. Trying to make progress towards a goal that cannot be completely obtained is so delusional, and everybody who tries is an idiot.

I think we should randomly pull people to the side and shoot them, even if they've done nothing wrong.

Liberals will protest that it's not fair to shoot people who have done nothing wrong, but life isn't fair!

Life is always going to suck. The notion that we can make it "fair" and make things "equal" is laughable at best. I mean look at the human population, look at how diverse it is. I don't think it's fair that I'm not rich like Paris Hilton, does that mean I should have Government give me money to make things fair?

This is also why I hate the phrase "The Grass is always greener on the other side". Because honestly, someone is always going to be at the bottom. I doubt people are crying themselves to sleep at night because they don't have the handicap that I have, or that they are fully abled body adults.

Life sucks, and it's scary, get used to it.

Here's a news flash. I don't want or need your concern.....but you need to educate yourself better and not be so ignorant of the truth. Keep watching CNN and PMSNBC. They'll surely teach you alot.

...

That does it. You want to talk about the truth, boy? Newsflash: I AM REALITY!

...

That does it. You want to talk about the truth, boy? Newsflash: I AM REALITY!

Then can I have a double cheeseburger with everything?

Then can I have a double cheeseburger with everything?

No, because a double cheeseburger is INCLUDED in everything. So you can either have a double cheeseburger or everything (which would be everything BUT a double cheeseburger PLUS a double cheeseburger).

...

That does it. You want to talk about the truth, boy? Newsflash: I AM REALITY!

You've just confirmed something I was suspicious of from the get-go.
The lights are on, but nobody's home!

No, because a double cheeseburger is INCLUDED in everything. So you can either have a double cheeseburger or everything (which would be everything BUT a double cheeseburger PLUS a double cheeseburger).

I'll take everything. :D

Life is always going to suck. The notion that we can make it "fair" and make things "equal" is laughable at best. I mean look at the human population, look at how diverse it is. I don't think it's fair that I'm not rich like Paris Hilton, does that mean I should have Government give me money to make things fair?

This is also why I hate the phrase "The Grass is always greener on the other side". Because honestly, someone is always going to be at the bottom. I doubt people are crying themselves to sleep at night because they don't have the handicap that I have, or that they are fully abled body adults.

Life sucks, and it's scary, get used to it.

Way to completely miss the point.
My entire point was that, yes, life will always be unfair, but that doesn't mean any attempt to make it less unfair is delusional.

Pretty good analysis, NA. Well done.

Way to completely miss the point.
My entire point was that, yes, life will always be unfair, but that doesn't mean any attempt to make it less unfair is delusional.

So if life is going to be unfair....and yet people stll try to make it fair....

I just got the image of someone who keeps running into a brick wall, gets knock flat on their ass, gets up, and tries again....and it just keeps replaying.

So if life is going to be unfair....and yet people stll try to make it fair....

I just got the image of someone who keeps running into a brick wall, gets knock flat on their ass, gets up, and tries again....and it just keeps replaying.

So your solution would be to say fuck it all, let's not try to help people who are less well off than others?

So if life is going to be unfair....and yet people stll try to make it fair....

I just got the image of someone who keeps running into a brick wall, gets knock flat on their ass, gets up, and tries again....and it just keeps replaying.

A better analogy would be a hospital that recognizes they can't save every life, but they can save some. Are doctors delusional because they try to save lives?
My ENTIRE POINT was that even though complete fairness is not obtainable, progress in the direction is. How hard is that to understand?

Can't tell if this is satire or not.

I will say this, liberals do tend to think that life should be fair....ha....poor delusional idiots.

A Libertarian is saying someone else is delusional?

How cute.

So your solution would be to say fuck it all, let's not try to help people who are less well off than others?

My solution would be to get the "less well off" off their collective asses and make something of themselves, so as to become better off.
Why do I need to work my tail off to support the "less well off"? Why can't I work my arse off and keep the money I earn, so as to support causes I DECIDE to support?
If I decide to give to the "less well off", that's called charity. When a government reaches into my paycheck, and takes the money I EARNED away from me, it's called theft, not taxation.

My solution would be to get the "less well off" off their collective asses and make something of themselves, so as to become better off.
Why do I need to work my tail off to support the "less well off"? Why can't I work my arse off and keep the money I earn, so as to support causes I DECIDE to support?
If I decide to give to the "less well off", that's called charity. When a government reaches into my paycheck, and takes the money I EARNED away from me, it's called theft, not taxation.

Why do you presume that the "less well off" are lazy bums who do nothing but leech off of all your hard work?

My solution would be to get the "less well off" off their collective asses and make something of themselves, so as to become better off.
Why do I need to work my tail off to support the "less well off"? Why can't I work my arse off and keep the money I earn, so as to support causes I DECIDE to support?
If I decide to give to the "less well off", that's called charity. When a government reaches into my paycheck, and takes the money I EARNED away from me, it's called theft, not taxation.

Oh, youre one of those delusional idiotic right wingers who think all poor people are just lazy and want to be poor.


Youre not worth my time.

Why do you presume that the "less well off" are lazy bums who do nothing but leech off of all your hard work?

There's no assumption of the kind. If you take government handouts, you're a bum. Get off your ass and earn some money to support yourself. If you are physically or mentally unable to, there are charities and family who can help.
But for anyone to accept money that I worked for, and didn't intend to give to them, is slovenly....and criminal.

I will say this, liberals do tend to think that life should be fair....ha....poor delusional idiots.So do libertarians, for that matter. They just define the term differently.

Oh, youre one of those delusional idiotic right wingers who think all poor people are just lazy and want to be poor.


Youre not worth my time.

I think I hear your mommy calling you, wee one.

So your solution would be to say fuck it all, let's not try to help people who are less well off than others?
Well, of course, because if you actually do anything to make life not suck entirely, then how are you going to get on the internet and enlighten people about how life sucks entirely? Hm? Eh? Did ya think of that, Mr. Smarty-Person? I'll bet you didn't.

Everyone who is not entirely deluded knows that its more important to appear to be cynical than to actually be a decent person. That is why only the hopelessly clueless think it might be worth while to arrange things so that we are not surrounded by suffering and injustice everywhere we go.

A better analogy would be a hospital that recognizes they can't save every life, but they can save some. Are doctors delusional because they try to save lives?
Obviously, since death is inevitable anyway, only a delusional person would try to stave it off or make it not hurt so much. Duh.

My ENTIRE POINT was that even though complete fairness is not obtainable, progress in the direction is. How hard is that to understand?
Apparently, your point is harder for him to understand than his point is for me to understand. I get it entirely. His world view allows him to sit on his ass and pontificate negatively on the internet, while your world view requires people to actually do something that's not entirely self-centered once in a while. Clearly, he prefers his own view to yours.

Sometimes I think Wilgrove might be my grandfather, Louie "It's All A Bunch Of Crap" Muravyets, returned from the grave, except my grandfather never learned to use a computer.

There's no assumption of the kind. If you take government handouts, you're a bum. Get off your ass and earn some money to support yourself. If you are physically or mentally unable to, there are charities and family who can help.
But for anyone to accept money that I worked for, and didn't intend to give to them, is slovenly....and criminal.

So you have absolutely nothing to support anything you say. Got it. You contribute nothing to this discussion, how dare you leech off of my hard-thought posts.

So you have absolutely nothing to support anything you say. Got it. You contribute nothing to this discussion, how dare you leech off of my hard-thought posts.

I see that lunacy runs rampant in your family. Good luck!

I see that lunacy runs rampant in your family. Good luck!

As you don't know anyone else in my family, you have nothing to base this off of. Once again, you post drivel with little to no meaning and literally nothing to support it.

I love it when they spice up their BS with unprovoked insults. It's so cute.

I think I hear your mommy calling you, wee one.

Ah, calling someone a child, when you have no evidence of them being a child. The last refuge of the ignorant and defeated.

I cant decide if I should put you on ignore or keep you around for endless lulz.


Lets turn this into a debate just to watch you flounder around helplessly. Back up the statement that poor and homeless people are just lazy and want to be poor. Go on. Ill wait. But I wont hold my breath.

As you don't know anyone else in my family, you have nothing to base this off of. Once again, you post drivel with little to no meaning and literally nothing to support it.

What's that smell???
Is it time for you to change your diaper?

What's that smell???
Is it time for you to change your diaper?

I do not wear a diaper. Further, since I am likely hundreds, if not thousands of miles away, any smell you are detecting is probably eminating from something nearby.

Ah, calling someone a child, when you have no evidence of them being a child. The last refuge of the ignorant and defeated.

I cant decide if I should put you on ignore or keep you around for endless lulz.


Lets turn this into a debate just to watch you flounder around helplessly. Back up the statement that poor and homeless people are just lazy and want to be poor. Go on. Ill wait. But I wont hold my breath.
I vote ignore. He's just another disposable troll.

What's that smell???
Is it time for you to change your diaper?

Ah, calling someone a child, when you have no evidence of them being a child. The last refuge of the ignorant and defeated.


;).

So if life is going to be unfair....and yet people stll try to make it fair....

I just got the image of someone who keeps running into a brick wall, gets knock flat on their ass, gets up, and tries again....and it just keeps replaying.

The government is going to intervene in people's lives.....and yet people still try to stop them....

I just got the image of someone who keeps running into a brick wall, gets knock flat on their ass, gets up, and tries again....and it just keeps replaying.

I think I hear your mommy calling you, wee one.

I see that lunacy runs rampant in your family. Good luck!

What's that smell???
Is it time for you to change your diaper?

Inability to argue without resorting to personal insults = a day off from posting.

Go away, troll.

So if life is going to be unfair....and yet people stll try to make it fair....

I just got the image of someone who keeps running into a brick wall, gets knock flat on their ass, gets up, and tries again....and it just keeps replaying.

how dare those idiots try to make life better for people

how dare those idiots try to make life better for people

They clearly hate freedom.

EDIT: To be fair, Libertarians want to make life better for people too. Rich people.

how dare those idiots try to make life better for people

now, now, Neo Art... some people do try to make life better for people... others only want to make life better for themselves. ;)

There's no assumption of the kind. If you take government handouts, you're a bum. Get off your ass and earn some money to support yourself. If you are physically or mentally unable to, there are charities and family who can help.
But for anyone to accept money that I worked for, and didn't intend to give to them, is slovenly....and criminal.

I just want to make sure I've got this right...so you're saying that if a single parent, who is working to put themselves through school, requires government assistance (or "handouts", as you call them), that they are a bum? A bum, despite the fact that they're working, raising a child, and getting an education so that they can "get off their asses and earn some money to support themselves"?

I'm not saying that all individuals who require government assistance fall into this category of "Striving to Improve Their Lot in Life", but you appear to be claiming that any individual who finds themselves requiring financial assistance is "a bum". I'd like you to clarify - are you really just dumping everyone into that category, without exception?

I'd like you to clarify that you really are just dumping everyone into that category.

He's a flaming troll, and I banned him for a day. Don't expect a quick answer.

Hell, don't expect an answer at all. That would be atypical.

He's a flaming troll, and I banned him for a day. Don't expect a quick answer.

Hell, don't expect an answer at all. That would be atypical.

Haha yeah, I got my post off, and then scrolled up to realize that he had been banned.

Lets turn this into a debate just to watch you flounder around helplessly. Back up the statement that poor and homeless people are just lazy and want to be poor. Go on. Ill wait. But I wont hold my breath.
Well I for one remember thinking back when I was homeless, "This is awesome!" Or "Sweet crap this fucking sucks!" ...one of the two...

I would say that those are certainly true at the micro-level. At the macro-level, however, I'd that what's really breaking McCain is a generational shift in politics. The Baby Boomers have always kept their politics centered on the splits their generation suffered in the 60's. It should be noted that this was a time of intense cultural and generational conflict but enormous fiscal and material prosperity, something the Boomers seem to have taken as status quo. There have been several major consequences of that.

What matters politically has, since about 1991, (when the new conservative consensus that began in '64 and came to power in '80 really solidified) been less what was happening now but how such events could be filtered into the Boomer worldview. The conservative consensus is a bit amorphous as there are few conservatives who espouse all elements with equal rigor, but generally speaking, it hinges on A) muscular foreign policy aimed around aggressive assertion of American hyperpower, particularly through economic and later military means, B) low taxation and business-friendly regulation, and C) reassertion of more traditional cultural memes without, importantly for someone studied in works like Tocqueville dealing with the subject, a consequent interest in American civic institutions.

I would say that all three became areas of significant dispute based primarily on the background conditions or key ideological conflicts of the 60's. The experience of Vietnam became the critical issue in how aggressive our foreign policy was, with the division first between hawks and doves, followed by a general agreement for muscular foreign policy in the wake of Gulf War I as some of the conservative doves came into consensus because of ultimately false lessons about the low cost of American power and liberal dove fear of castigation. Low taxation was the primary way to both reject the prior Keynesian consensus that Boomers had felt crippled the economy in the 70's as they entered the workforce en masse, and a way to reject their elder's support for New Deal reforms. The reassertion of conservative cultural memes was initially a coded way of dealing with integrating African-Americans, but it later on became a way of dealing with large structural shifts in the American economy and society. I would note, however, that Boomers never tied in questions about society, war, or taxation with questions about structural durability of society because they never had to take it into account: they grew up in a society that had already spent 20 years on life-support by building at low-cost a massive infrastructure system of power plants and transportation coupled with an explosion of industrial capacity.

The problem of McCain is that most of these assumptions have been steadily unraveling for some time, and have now all blown up just as he was heading into the election. Iraq has demonstrated both the fact that American hyperpower is drastically less than what we took it for after Gulf War I, and exhausting to use in large scale over an extended period of time. The use of low taxation and resultant deficit spending is currently compounding all of our problems because our assets are tapped out at precisely the moment we're scrounging for proverbial change to pay for Iraq and the economic meltdown. As American society has structurally shifted, our interest in social concerns has lessened, partly because African-Americans and women are now significantly more integrated, partly because despite this integration the proverbial sky hasn't fallen, and partly because more salient factors have gained prominence.

Compounding all of these facts is that a significant portion of the population is now recognizing the three above factors, where before the Boomers had either a consensus or a rigid split along ideological lines. The 18-year old voting for the first time in this election, interestingly enough, has no living memory of the actual first Gulf War. The only thing they know about it is what the History Channel back before about 2001 was tellling them if they watched it. The problems inherent in supply-side economics have been masked for the Boomers, but they're readily apparent to the new labor force hitting the bottom rungs of the economic ladder and often failing to climb or getting thrown back off. Socially, younger Americans are far more likely to look at the code-words of the culture wars concerning race, sexual orientation, and gender as complete non-issues. With rare exceptions, all younger Americans take as given that Martin Luther King Jr. was right, gays are acceptable as peers, friends, and associates if not lovers, and that women ought to be treated as equal for equivalent work.

In short, ideologically it was likely going to be inevitable that the conservative consensus was going to undermine itself, just as the prior Keynesian/liberal consensus undermined itself. They both worked spectacularly for addressing issues relevant to the generation that created them, but they don't work once the relevant material conditions that give rise to that consensus change. The generation that comes after, because they haven't seen the same conflicts that their parents have, have to deal with new relevant material conditions, and often has to deal with a consensus that is unresponsive to their needs, is the first to recognize the failure of the prior consensus. It just so happens that the crackup for the conservative consensus has come during Bush II's first and second term, and it just so happens it's accelerated in recent months, and it just so happens that McCain is trying to represent the conservative consensus, however much he may speak to reform. Micro-level, he's been making tactical mistake after tactical mistake. But a lot of his mistakes wouldn't have been mistakes, it is important to note, if it was 1996. He just had the rotton luck of running 12 years too late against the Barry Goldwater/Ronald Reagan of the newer generation.

-snip-

I absolutely refuse, refuse, to let you come into MY thread and be far more intelligent, poignant, and sophisticated than I was.

Call someone a douche bag and gtfo!

What would America be without all you liberals to laugh at?

An evangelical Iran?

I would say that those are certainly true at the micro-level. <snip>
Respect. :hail:

Man, Neo Art, between your thread explaining the economic crisis, and now this, you are in serious danger of drastically raising the intelligence level of this forum. :D

You've just confirmed something I was suspicious of from the get-go.
The lights are on, but nobody's home!

Boy, let me tell you something:

I know more than you. I am smarter than you. I argue better than you. I speak better than you. I am quite likely more attractive than you, as well.

And that only adds up to 5 things, out of the much, much bigger universe of them, in which I'm better than you. I'm sure I could drive that list way, way up if I wanted. Now, I'm giving you a choice, in all my magnanimous kindness: Do you want to go on spewing more bullshit and showing how much your better I am or do you want to cut your losses?

Take the second option, kid.

Man, Neo Art, between your thread explaining the economic crisis, and now this, you are in serious danger of drastically raising the intelligence level of this forum. :D

Indeed. Neo Art must be dealt with.

*Grabs tire iron*

*stares at tire iron deep in thought*

*Gives Muravyets tire iron*

You do it. I think he might like it:tongue:

Indeed. Neo Art must be dealt with.

*Grabs tire iron*

*stares at tire iron deep in thought*

*Gives Muravyets tire iron*

You do it. I think he might like it:tongue:

*Grabs pop corn*

Indeed. Neo Art must be dealt with.

*Grabs tire iron*

*stares at tire iron deep in thought*

*Gives Muravyets tire iron*

You do it. I think he might like it:tongue:
Wha? Huh? How did this get to be my job? :wink:

Wha? Huh? How did this get to be my job? :wink:

You know. ;)

You know. ;)
You people have filthy minds. Hmph.

You people have filthy minds. Hmph.

oh baby, we both know we can't hide it any longer.

Life is always going to suck. The notion that we can make it "fair" and make things "equal" is laughable at best. I mean look at the human population, look at how diverse it is. I don't think it's fair that I'm not rich like Paris Hilton, does that mean I should have Government give me money to make things fair?

This is also why I hate the phrase "The Grass is always greener on the other side". Because honestly, someone is always going to be at the bottom. I doubt people are crying themselves to sleep at night because they don't have the handicap that I have, or that they are fully abled body adults.

Life sucks, and it's scary, get used to it.
In one sense, you're right, in that resource allocation will almost always result in this, at least till we become technologically sophisticated enough that we are able to move on from limitations and eliminate scarcity.

But that doesn't mean the floor needs to be so low and the ceiling so high, especially given the wealth and resources we have at our fingertips. There's no reason for ANY American to be in poverty, to have to suffer homelessness, to have to wonder where their next meal is going to come from.

We can raise that floor up to a good level for all without any negative effect on the rest of us. The only ones who will feel a pinch are the superwealthy, and if all it means is that they can only buy one private jet instead of three, I'd call it a more than worthy exchange.

In one sense, you're right, in that resource allocation will almost always result in this, at least till we become technologically sophisticated enough that we are able to move on from limitations and eliminate scarcity.

But that doesn't mean the floor needs to be so low and the ceiling so high, especially given the wealth and resources we have at our fingertips. There's no reason for ANY American to be in poverty, to have to suffer homelessness, to have to wonder where their next meal is going to come from.

We can raise that floor up to a good level for all without any negative effect on the rest of us. The only ones who will feel a pinch are the superwealthy, and if all it means is that they can only buy one private jet instead of three, I'd call it a more than worthy exchange.

No! No! Delusional. He said so! Ergo, it is true.

oh baby, we both know we can't hide it any longer.

You like being beaten with tire irons?

This is news!

oh baby, we both know we can't hide it any longer.
Ugh, please. As if. *smacks NA with tire iron*

You like being beaten with tire irons?

This is news!
No, it isn't. We've always known he's a little spank-punk. :tongue:

No, it isn't. We've always known he's a little spank-punk. :tongue:

Yeah, but I always figured he'd be the one doing the spanking. :p

No! No! Delusional. He said so! Ergo, it is true.

Wilgrove can claim that it's delusional however he wants, but it's not born out by the facts. Diversity and multiculturalism STRENGTHENS a nation when everyone is willing to work together.

The key is the willingness. Obviously, that's a hard thing to achieve, but to pretend it's completely unachievable only prevents it from ever actually being so. EVERYONE has to pitch in, and that includes the people who say it can't be done.

No, it isn't. We've always known he's a little spank-punk. :tongue:

Definitly. Bend over.

You too Poli.

Definitly. Bend over.

You too Poli.
Wait, which of us is holding the tire iron? Oh, right -- not you. *smack!*

Wait, which of us is holding the tire iron? Oh, right -- not you. *smack!*

you're cute when you try to be in charge.

you're cute when you try to be in charge.
You're cuter when you're in denial.

EDIT: Meanwhile, poor Kyronea is trying to have a serious and intelligent discussion. You should be ashamed of yourself. You're a bad host.

I think the problem for John McCain is that, previously, the main objection to Barack Obama was the fact that people didn't know much about him. The problem is that as more and more people see him talk, more and more people like him, especially in contrast to John McCain.

I had the same switch during the primaries, I'd felt that Barack Obama had ridden a general desire for anything new but as I watched him gather his issues together, the one thing that really stood out was: this guy is really smart.

Now John Kerry and Al Gore may also be very smart but they often came across as confusing, they weren't switched on.

John McCain does not come across as smart, and the more people learn about him, the less smart he appears.

The VP selections simply bolster than opinion.

Personally I suspect many Republicans are silently thinking 'if only Mitt Romney wasn't a goddamn Mormon'.

You're cuter when you're in denial.

EDIT: Meanwhile, poor Kyronea is trying to have a serious and intelligent discussion. You should be ashamed of yourself. You're a bad host.

I get bored and start thinking about boobs.

I think the problem for John McCain is that, previously, the main objection to Barack Obama was the fact that people didn't know much about him. The problem is that as more and more people see him talk, more and more people like him, especially in contrast to John McCain.

I had the same switch during the primaries, I'd felt that Barack Obama had ridden a general desire for anything new but as I watched him gather his issues together, the one thing that really stood out was: this guy is really smart.

Now John Kerry and Al Gore may also be very smart but they often came across as confusing, they weren't switched on.

John McCain does not come across as smart, and the more people learn about him, the less smart he appears.

The VP selections simply bolster than opinion.

Personally I suspect many Republicans are silently thinking 'if only Mitt Romney wasn't a goddamn Mormon'.

I had a similiar experience. During the primaries, I initially supported Clinton, out of familiarity, and knowing that she could at least handle the economy, which is what the US needs. But the more I saw of Obama, the more I was convinced that it didn't matter whether Clinton or Obama became president, the US would benefit. But now I'm convinced Obama is undoubtably the right person to be president. He beat the odds just by getting the nomination, and is now winning in the polls by a significant margin in a country that still has a large portion of people hating him simply because of his skin colour. If Obama can manage the country as successfully as he has managed his campaign, then the US stands to benefit greately from an Obama presidency.

You're a bad host.

Bad, BAD HOST! GO SIT ON THE CORNER!

You're cuter when you're in denial.

EDIT: Meanwhile, poor Kyronea is trying to have a serious and intelligent discussion. You should be ashamed of yourself. You're a bad host.

We could be sexy instead.

Dom me, Muravyets!