Why he will win

[Sodas]

Obama is going to win this election, and you can quote me on that. Here is the most important reason why...

1. Dobson will cripple McCain in the Evangelical vote. There has been a vast shift in Evangelical philosphy. Many, like Richard Cizik, vice president of the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), have tried to talk about global warming, compassion for the poor (war against poverty), and other world-wide problems. This is a very holistic approach to religion, one that Obama shares.

Dobson control over Evangelical issues has waned ever since he was so instrumental in W's rise. He is a lead weight amongst many Evangelicals and will definately be an albatross around McCain's neck.

Btw, McCain down by 12-15 points is just the start...

LA Times / Bloomberg

Obama 49 - McCain 37
Obama 48 - McCain 33 w/ Barr and Nader
MOE 3% - registered voters
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-poll25-2008jun25,0,5763707.story

NewsWeek
Obama 51 - McCain 36
http://www.newsweek.com/id/142465?from=rss

[irerancincpkc]

Yes, I normally don't put much hold in poll numbers, but a fifteen point lead after a grueling primary; wow.

[Terez]

So much for division and strife among the Democrats...

[irerancincpkc]

Yeah, wait till we get more of Clinton's supporters...

[Davian93]

Historically, candidates with huge leads in June tend to see those leads shrink away as the election season heads towards fall. The more people get over the rockstar effect of Obama's campaign and actually hear his ideas, you will see the polls change accordingly.

[irerancincpkc]

They were saying that same thing in November of last year. Didn't happen then...

[Davian93]

They were saying that same thing in November of last year. Didn't happen then...

Which proves my thesis that most Democrats are morons. ;)

[Gilshalos Sedai]

Hey, now, Dav...



Besides, all he's really promising is change. He doesn't actually have to say anything else.

[Ivhon]

Hey, now, Dav...



Besides, all he's really promising is change. He doesn't actually have to say anything else.

This is very true.

Heard a good argument regarding Obama's experience yesterday.

What has the decades of experience in the Bush administration netted us? Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell (although, I think of Powell as a patsy tbh) all have decades of experience - Cheney and Rumsfeld at least going back to Viet Nam. What did they learn? What did they do for us as a country?

If that's what experience gets us, well...I don't want it.

[Gilshalos Sedai]

Well, I'm not actually certain there's anything that you can do to PREPARE you to take on the mantle of President. After all, the Founding Fathers, in their infinite wisdom only required you be 35 and a natural born citizen. (One more year, baby! One more year!)

[Sei'taer]

~Sigh~ It doesn't even matter anymore. Life doesn't matter anymore. Believe whatever you like Sodas, Ire, Terez, Ivhon et al. You are all arguing a moot point. (http://www.theoryland.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=387)

[Realnow]

Besides, all he's really promising is change. He doesn't actually have to say anything else.

Good point, anyone can promise to simply change things. And without actually promising certain things either, it allows for more flexibility after winning to choose what actually to change and what not.

Also, I don't think you can argue that the problem with the Bush administration was experience. You could say it had/has many problems but I think that its pretty much a given that experience IS a benefit.

[GonzoTheGreat]

Which proves my thesis that most Democrats are morons.
Are you accusing the Democrats of being Real Americans?
I thought only Republicans were allowed to claim that title.

[Birgitte]

Welcome to Theoryland Realnow! (You should go make a newbie thread so I can make Pinocchio jokes!). I'm not so sure experience is always a good thing. Haven't you seen Mr. Smith Goes to Washington? The dude knows pretty much no one there and nothing about what he's doing and does more good than everyone else who'd been there most of their lives. Not that Obama is really like Mr. Smith, but I'm just saying, experience in politics doesn't necessarily equal a person being good for the country. Because Politicians are evil. Like lawyers.

And of course, they're real Americans, Gonzo. At least they're better than those crazy Europeans.

[Ishara]

Decades of experience in politics gets you decades of experience manipulating the system...

[Sinistrum]

Decades of experience in politics gets you decades of experience manipulating the system...

It also gets you decades of favors owed to special interests which is typically why "experience" is made such a big deal over. Someone without "experience" can't get campaign contributes because they don't owe anyone any favors and can't be leaned on because of it.

As for the polls, I think it is a little bit premature to be declaring victory before the first shots are really even fired. Not that I'm rooting for McCain (or Obama for that matter), but a lot can happen in four months.

I've got a question for you Obama supporters. What exactly does he stand? Aside from this amorphous concept called "change" he keeps talking about in lieu of an actual platform and some vagueries about pulling out of Iraq in 2010 I've yet to see some concrete issue stances out of him. Maybe you guys have better sources than I do and can help me out.

[Ozymandias]

I've got a question for you Obama supporters. What exactly does he stand? Aside from this amorphous concept called "change" he keeps talking about in lieu of an actual platform and some vagueries about pulling out of Iraq in 2010 I've yet to see some concrete issue stances out of him. Maybe you guys have better sources than I do and can help me out.

Sini, capturing a politicians entire platform in a post is difficult, and I've been away and am not up to date on his policies as they stand now, but let me say this. ANY change is good change. I assume your an American citizen; can you imagine the country on a worse track than its on right now? The economy is tanking and nothing has stopped it, we're pouring money into Iraq and building the deficit to extremely unhealthy levels, international opinion is virulently anti-US, and cronyism is even more rampant in Washington than usual.

In what way could change hurt? And I'm only half joking when I ask, how could the trajectory this country is on get any more depressing?

On a more reasonable note, you have to also see that McCain hasn't, to my mind, really made an impactful statement. The only thing that could possibly recommend him over Barack is that he's held the same opinions for years and hasn't changed them, but I subscribe to the camp that sees flip flopping as adapting, not being a hypocrite.

I'm voting based on a few major issues; the economy, social values, and the image of America abroad. McCain has done absolutely zero to show that he'll have a better plan to haul the economy out of the doldrums than Bush did... its just more of the same, more of that very same which didn't work last time round. His social issues I just don't agree on. And as for the respect of the international community... well, lets just say Barack Obama would be the clear winner if it was decided on that alone, by a margin of perhaps 98 points.

[Terez]

McCain has actually done quite a bit of flip-flopping...

[irerancincpkc]

McCain has actually done quite a bit of flip-flopping...
Terez, didn't you get the memo? It's old age, his mind's fault, not his. :D

[JSUCamel]

I'm also of the opinion that "flip-flopping" in most cases isn't being a hypocrite, it's changing with the times. I've changed my minds a hundred times about a hundred things, but that doesn't make me a hypocrite.

So Obama said he supported public financing, but he decided to go private. So what? I support legalizing marijuana, but I don't smoke it. McCain has made plenty of similar statements and gone back on them. They're both flip-floppers.. so calling either one that doesn't really solve anything.

I haven't decided who I'm voting for, and I'll reserve my judgment until just before the election. I hesitate to declare for a candidate, because quite honestly, I don't know what any of them stand for. I know what they've said during the primaries, but most of it was saying a whole lot of nothing.

They use big fancy words, say big fancy terms. They call for "change" or "stability" or a "cleaning up of Washington". They run their mouths 24/7. But what have they really said?

Tell you what, Senators.. Show up to Senate sessions. Vote for the bills you believe are good for America, and that's good enough for me. That'll tell me volumes more than you saying you stand for "change".

I want a politician who isn't afraid to say what they truly believe. Everything is run through focus groups. Every word they say is carefully calculated to bring in the most votes. Why would I want to vote for that?

Be honest with me. If I feel a candidate is being honest with me, I'll like him more and I'll trust him more. Even if I don't agree 100% with his views.

My best friend is pretty honest with me. He tells me flat out if I've done something stupid. He tells me if I did a good job or a bad job, if I've crossed the line, if I've impressed him. And I believe him when he says these things, because I can tell he honestly believes these things and that he tells me because he wants what's best for me.

My best friend married the rebound girl. I think it's stupid, a waste of time and money, and that he's making a big mistake. I told him so.

But regardless of whether I agree with his decision or not, he's still my best friend.

Being electable, to me, is standing up for what you believe in, regardless of appeasing everyone in your target demographic.

There's no way you're going to be able to represent a majority of American's opinions exactly. Tell me your beliefs in plain terms with no ambiguity. If I agree with you for the most part, and I think you're being honest, you've got my vote.

Right now, I'm not voting for anybody. They don't SAY anything. They just dodge the questions, answer in vague statements, contradict themselves depending on who they're talking to, and speak in circles.

I want honesty.
I want integrity.

And I think I speak for every American when I say that.

And while it will never happen, I believe if a candidate were truly candid about their beliefs... they'd be a lot more popular than focus groups would indicate.

[Sinistrum]

Sini, capturing a politicians entire platform in a post is difficult,

No it's not. Just list off his stances issue by issue. There are only about 10-12 really major relevant issues at the current time.

ANY change is good change. I assume your an American citizen; can you imagine the country on a worse track than its on right now?

I disagree and I can absolutely imagine the country on a much worse track than the one we are on now. Change for the sake of change accomplishes nothing and usually only ends up making things worse. Change that is constructive, positive, and feasible is the only kind of change I'm interested in.

On a more reasonable note, you have to also see that McCain hasn't, to my mind, really made an impactful statement.

Perhaps, perhaps not. Since I'm not a McCain supporter I don't see what relevance this has to my question though. Sorry Ozy but you can't use the old "well you're candidate's doing it too so you're a hypocrit to complain about mine" tactic here.

[Frenzy]

pure hypothetical here. If i think there's a strong chance that Obama will be assassinated if he's elected (i mean moreso than just because he's the American president), should i vote for him?

[Terez]

Assuming that you would otherwise vote for him, then why not? He chose to run for president, so it's not as if there's a guilt issue here, and as long as he picks a running mate you're relatively happy with, then no problem...

[Frenzy]

Killing the man would suck personally (duh), but killing the sitting president causes a LOT of bad things to happen to the country. Especially if the killer is a foreigner. Are we as a country prepared to deal with THOSE consequences?

[GonzoTheGreat]

Well, you can of course weasel out in advance if you don't have the courage to take such a risk. It is true that history shows bad consequences for countries that elected the 'wrong' leaders: Iran in 1953, the USA in 1963, Chili in 1973 all got into trouble as a result of such murders. In all cases the CIA was involved, but in one case it is a bit debatable whether that should count as foreign.

[irerancincpkc]

Sorry, but I think it's stupid to not vote for someone that you would otherwise out of fear.

[Terez]

Killing the man would suck personally (duh), but killing the sitting president causes a LOT of bad things to happen to the country. Especially if the killer is a foreigner. Are we as a country prepared to deal with THOSE consequences?
Seems to me that this is an awfully irrational reason to not vote for someone, considering that the assassination liklihood, while believable for various reasons, is essentially unfounded.

[Crispin's Crispian]

Seems to me that this is an awfully irrational reason to not vote for someone, considering that the assassination liklihood, while believable for various reasons, is essentially unfounded.


Ask yourself this, Frenzy: Is it more likely that Obama will be assassinated or that McCain will die in office of natural causes?

[Terez]

Ask yourself this, Frenzy: Is it more likely that Obama will be assassinated or that McCain will die in office of natural causes?
I thought about pointing that out, but I think she's saying that the aftermath of an assassination would be tragic (while the aftermath of a natural death, not so much). I still think it's an odd thing to base a vote on.

[Crispin's Crispian]

I thought about pointing that out, but I think she's saying that the aftermath of an assassination would be tragic (while the aftermath of a natural death, not so much). I still think it's an odd thing to base a vote on.
I know she's saying that, too, but if you're seriously considering the assassination scenario you have to consider the natural death scenario even more strongly.

It is a very odd thing to base a vote on.

[Davian93]

Ask yourself this, Frenzy: Is it more likely that Obama will be assassinated or that McCain will die in office of natural causes?

I don't see either happening. McCain is very healthy for his age and the protection around any president is so good as to preclude a legitimate shot at assassination.

[JSUCamel]

I don't see either happening. McCain is very healthy for his age and the protection around any president is so good as to preclude a legitimate shot at assassination.

Famous last words:

"Why, Mary, my dear, that play was quite wonderfu--" - Abraham Lincoln

"Jackie, honey, we're perfectly safe in Texas. We're in a motorcade for crying out loud! Just smile and wave and everything will be all ri--" - JFK

[Frenzy]

i haven't decided what i'm going to base my vote on, because i'm not paying attention until October. it's my own personal protest against the news media and the obscene amount of money it costs to run an election because the things are too damn long.

[Sodas]

Why wait until the election to make the decision though? The Candidates don't really change between now and then.

[tanaww]

Or you can all just vote for Tana / Hopper '08. The No-Bullshit Ticket