So when is this Veep thing happening? I would like to be able to spend at least one hour of my work day discussing it with people at work and waste more of my time arguing about it here.

On the one hand, McCain wins more simulations for the first time ever, which is nice.

On the other, he doesn't know how many houses he owns, which is really the opposite of nice.

philliesphhan wrote:

Laexile wrote:
For a while it seemed Obama was promising everyone everything

This never happened. No matter how much McCain's ads may tell you it did. Just because he says 'hope' and 'change' a few times doesn't mean he told me all my dreams will come true if he's president.

He may not have told you that, but during the primaries he told an audience, "You want to hear how I'm going to solve all your problems."

He said he was going to solve Iraq and Afghanistan. He'll go into Pakistan to get the terrorists without any consequences. He'll raise America's image in the international community while also getting Europe to take on more responsibility internationally. He's going to bring Iran into line without the possibility of military action. He's going to talk to them and bring them in line. There's no need for us to have an aggressive stance. He's going to get intelligence without torture. He's going to convict all the terrorists in US civilian courts.

He said he was going to lower gas prices but was for decreased gas consumption for conservation. He told an Ohio audience that he was going to reopen NAFTA. He's bringing the jobs back while insisting on strict human rights and environmental standards in all trade agreements.

He's lowering everyone's taxes except those rotten rich folks. He's socking it to them. He's providing healthcare for anyone who wants it. He's bringing the economy back while closing those tax loopholes the evil corporations take advantage of. He's saving social security and cutting carbon emissions by 80%. We don't need more oil or nuclear because he's giving us solar and wind power.

He's going to solve campaign finance to eliminate the influence of evil Republican corporation's lobbyists. He's changing the way Washington works and getting rid of the influence special interests have. He's ending partisanship and bring Republicans and Democrats together.

Not only has he said he'll solve all the problems, but he'll solve them all perfectly without any compromise or sacrifice by anyone other than the undeserving rich and evil corporations. Oprah proclaims, "he's the one." He says "We are the ones we've been waiting for." Is it any wonder that some people had such high expectations?

If this isn't what some supporters believe why tell them yesterday that he wasn't going to solve all their problems immediately on taking office? The problem I now see with such high expectations is that all Obama can do is fail. If a voter finds some flaw, they may not vote for him.

John McCain has staked out a position of "I can't bring all the jobs back. I can't solve all the problems. But I'll work hard every day." He takes a stand against Ethanol and Boeing. I thought his approach was something that would cost him votes. Maybe it'll be the opposite. Once people get past the idea that McCain is telling them his policy doesn't agree with what they want some of them are satisfied with that because McCain gave them straight talk.

jerseyhoya wrote:On the one hand, McCain wins more simulations for the first time ever, which is nice.

On the other, he doesn't know how many houses he owns, which is really the opposite of nice.

In fairness he doesn't own any. He signed a pre-nup so that he doesn't get any of Cindy's assets in case of divorce. She owns the business and all the houses and they file separate tax returns.

Laexile wrote:

philliesphhan wrote:

Laexile wrote:
For a while it seemed Obama was promising everyone everything

This never happened. No matter how much McCain's ads may tell you it did. Just because he says 'hope' and 'change' a few times doesn't mean he told me all my dreams will come true if he's president.

He may not have told you that, but during the primaries he told an audience, "You want to hear how I'm going to solve all your problems."

He said he was going to solve Iraq and Afghanistan. He'll go into Pakistan to get the terrorists without any consequences. He'll raise America's image in the international community while also getting Europe to take on more responsibility internationally. He's going to bring Iran into line without the possibility of military action. He's going to talk to them and bring them in line. There's no need for us to have an aggressive stance. He's going to get intelligence without torture. He's going to convict all the terrorists in US civilian courts.

He said he was going to lower gas prices but was for decreased gas consumption for conservation. He told an Ohio audience that he was going to reopen NAFTA. He's bringing the jobs back while insisting on strict human rights and environmental standards in all trade agreements.

He's lowering everyone's taxes except those rotten rich folks. He's socking it to them. He's providing healthcare for anyone who wants it. He's bringing the economy back while closing those tax loopholes the evil corporations take advantage of. He's saving social security and cutting carbon emissions by 80%. We don't need more oil or nuclear because he's giving us solar and wind power.

He's going to solve campaign finance to eliminate the influence of evil Republican corporation's lobbyists. He's changing the way Washington works and getting rid of the influence special interests have. He's ending partisanship and bring Republicans and Democrats together.

Not only has he said he'll solve all the problems, but he'll solve them all perfectly without any compromise or sacrifice by anyone other than the undeserving rich and evil corporations. Oprah proclaims, "he's the one." He says "We are the ones we've been waiting for." Is it any wonder that some people had such high expectations?

If this isn't what some supporters believe why tell them yesterday that he wasn't going to solve all their problems immediately on taking office? The problem I now see with such high expectations is that all Obama can do is fail. If a voter finds some flaw, they may not vote for him.

John McCain has staked out a position of "I can't bring all the jobs back. I can't solve all the problems. But I'll work hard every day." He takes a stand against Ethanol and Boeing. I thought his approach was something that would cost him votes. Maybe it'll be the opposite. Once people get past the idea that McCain is telling them his policy doesn't agree with what they want some of them are satisfied with that because McCain gave them straight talk.

I call BS. He never said that. He has been just as good at McCain at telling people that he's not here to solve all their problems "WE" are going to solve all our problems, or at least, "we're" the only ones who can. He's gone out of his way to say that the govt is not a magical genie. You're just not listening.

i've lost a great deal of respect for Obama from the beginning (possibly because it was too high to sustain), but that is not at all a reason. If anything I started to like him most because he wasn't telling people that government can fix everything or that he can fix everything. Not many democrats do that. You can criticize him on a lot, but not that.

Laexile wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:On the one hand, McCain wins more simulations for the first time ever, which is nice.

On the other, he doesn't know how many houses he owns, which is really the opposite of nice.

In fairness he doesn't own any. He signed a pre-nup so that he doesn't get any of Cindy's assets in case of divorce. She owns the business and all the houses and they file separate tax returns.

Good argument. I really hope McCain spouts nonsense like that during one of the debates.

BAGHDAD -- U.S. and Iraqi negotiators reached agreement on a security deal that calls for American military forces to leave Iraq's cities by next summer as a prelude to a full withdrawal of combat troops from the country, according to senior American officials.

The draft agreement sets 2011 as the goal date by which U.S. combat troops will leave Iraq, according to Iraqi Deputy Foreign Minister Mohammed al-Haj Humood and other people familiar with the matter. In the meantime, American troops will be leaving cities, towns and other population centers by the summer of 2009, living in bases outside of those areas, according to the draft.

Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council, cautioned that the deal was not yet complete. "Discussions are ongoing with the Iraqis to finalize a bilateral agreement," he said. "We are working to complete the agreement, but it is not final yet."

President George W. Bush is almost certain to accept the agreement, according to U.S. officials. The administration believes that the deal doesn't require congressional approval and won't present it to U.S. lawmakers.

The situation is more complicated in Iraq. The draft agreement must be approved by several layers of Iraqi political leaders. Several members of Mr. Maliki's cabinet have voiced opposition to elements of the deal. The Iraqi Parliament, which also has to sign off on the deal, is in recess until the beginning of September.

The security deal came together after the Bush administration made concessions on several long-held positions. The White House softened its stance over a pullout date after it became clear that Mr. Maliki was adamant that the agreement contain at least a vague timetable for a U.S. withdrawal.

Link

That just means it's going to be that much harder to take Baghdad again once the fighting starts.

Obama: it is clear now that the Iraqis want us out of there and as Mr. Maliki indicated before, he supports my withdrawal plans

McCain: this means the surge worked! Something my opponent did not support

Obama: But clearly we won't be in Iraq 5,000 years as my opponent has indicated he wants to do, he's a warmongering Bushie

McCain: My opponent is obviously unfit to lead; if he were in charge we'd never be in a position to set a time table and terrorists would be running amuk terrorizing and threatening freedom of the Iraqi people

Obama: If I were in charge we wouldn't be there in the first place and nor would the terrorists!

McCain: ...and we'd be fighting the war over here instead of over there! And meanwhile, a maniacal dictator would be in power

jeff2sf wrote:I call BS. He never said that. He has been just as good at McCain at telling people that he's not here to solve all their problems "WE" are going to solve all our problems, or at least, "we're" the only ones who can. He's gone out of his way to say that the govt is not a magical genie. You're just not listening.

i've lost a great deal of respect for Obama from the beginning (possibly because it was too high to sustain), but that is not at all a reason. If anything I started to like him most because he wasn't telling people that government can fix everything or that he can fix everything. Not many democrats do that. You can criticize him on a lot, but not that.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/econo ... llPlan.pdf

We don't need debates. We have Woody.

Woody wrote:Obama: it is clear now that the Iraqis want us out of there and as Mr. Maliki indicated before, he supports my withdrawal plans

McCain: this means the surge worked! Something my opponent did not support

Obama: But clearly we won't be in Iraq 5,000 years as my opponent has indicated he wants to do, he's a warmongering Bushie

McCain: My opponent is obviously unfit to lead; if he were in charge we'd never be in a position to set a time table and terrorists would be running amuk terrorizing and threatening freedom of the Iraqi people

Obama: If I were in charge we wouldn't be there in the first place and nor would the terrorists!

McCain: ...and we'd be fighting the war over here instead of over there! And meanwhile, a maniacal dictator would be in power

Werthless wrote:

jeff2sf wrote:I call BS. He never said that. He has been just as good at McCain at telling people that he's not here to solve all their problems "WE" are going to solve all our problems, or at least, "we're" the only ones who can. He's gone out of his way to say that the govt is not a magical genie. You're just not listening.

i've lost a great deal of respect for Obama from the beginning (possibly because it was too high to sustain), but that is not at all a reason. If anything I started to like him most because he wasn't telling people that government can fix everything or that he can fix everything. Not many democrats do that. You can criticize him on a lot, but not that.

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/econo ... llPlan.pdf

What does John McCain's economic policy plan? "F you, you guys figure it out yourself"? No, of course not, he has a plan that talks about what he can do for you.

"John McCain has a comprehensive economic plan that will create millions of good American jobs, ensure our nation's energy security, get the government's budget and spending practices in order, and bring relief to American consumers. Read each of the sections below to learn how the McCain Economic Plan will help bring reform, prosperity and peace to America."

From his site. Again, Obama is not offering to solve all YOUR problems, but obviously he's going to have a plan on how to "turn around" America. That the plan includes rhetoric is just part of the game.

Debate formats finalized:

The Obama and McCain campaigns released a joint statement today noting their agreement on three presidential debates and one vice presidential debate. All four debates will begin at 9pm ET, and last for 90 minutes.

First Presidential Debate -- September 26 at the University of Mississippi
Topic: Foreign Policy & National Security
Moderator: Jim Lehrer
Staging: Podium debate
Answer Format: The debate will be broken into nine, 9-minute segments. The moderator will introduce a topic and allow each candidate 2 minutes to comment. After these initial answers, the moderator will facilitate an open discussion of the topic for the remaining 5 minutes, ensuring that both candidates receive an equal amount of time to comment

Vice Presidential Debate -- October 2 at Washington University (St. Louis)
Moderator: Gwen Ifill
Staging/Answer Format: To be resolved after both parties' Vice Presidential nominees are selected.

Second Presidential Debate -- October 7 at Belmont University
Moderator: Tom Brokaw
Staging: Town Hall debate
Format: The moderator will call on members of the audience (and draw questions from the internet). Each candidate will have 2 minutes to respond to each question. Following those initial answers, the moderator will invite the candidates to respond to the previous answers, for a total of 1 minute, ensuring that both candidates receive an equal amount of time to comment. In the spirit of the Town Hall, all questions will come from the audience (or internet), and not the moderator.

Third Presidential Debate -- October 15 at Hofstra University
Topic: Domestic and Economic policy
Moderator: Bob Schieffer
Staging: Candidates will be seated at a table
Answer Format: Same as First Presidential Debate
Closing Statements: At the end of this debate (only) each candidate shall have the opportunity for a 90 second closing statement.

A good friend of my wife is involved with the Hofstra event. I might see if I can go...

My preference still would be for three debates, in this format:

1) A two-hour debate in which each candidate has a total of 55 minutes (with the moderator and commercials accounting for the other 10), which s/he can use however they see fit--but when it's gone, it's gone. This would somewhat showcase multi-dimensional decision-making and prioritizing; McCain, for instance, might want to use more of his time on foreign policy since he perceives that as his strength, but if he totally neglects pocketbook issues, he knows the media pinheads might get on him for it.

2) A two-hour "team" debate in which each candidate can bring two advisers to the stage with him/her, either to whisper advice or offer color commentary of sorts. This would give some insight into the sort of people the potential president would call upon for support, and also by inference how they make those decisions.

3) A drinking-contest town hall debate, where both candidates have to do shots every 15 minutes for the entirety of the two hours. Only the last hour would be televised, and ringers would be selected to ask particularly difficult/partisan questions for the last hour.

Futurama I think once posited that the VP debate should be a "You Mama So Fat" contest. That works too. Think about Gore-Quayle or Cheney-Lieberman getting into that; good stuff.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpmFd25tRqo[/youtube]

Obama ad on the McCain houses comment (fuckin hell, what a turn around!)

McCain camp push back:

“Does a guy who made more than $4 million last year, just got back from vacation on a private beach in Hawaii and bought his own million-dollar mansion with the help of a convicted felon really want to get into a debate about houses? Does a guy who worries about the price of arugula and thinks regular people “cling” to guns and religion in the face of economic hardship really want to have a debate about who’s in touch with regular Americans?

“The reality is that Barack Obama’s plans to raise taxes and opposition to producing more energy here at home as gas prices skyrocket show he’s completely out of touch with the concerns of average Americans.”

It just occurred to me that if Steve Schmidt and the other Little Roves were running Obama's campaign, we'd be seeing 'round the clock airing of an ad campaign called "John McCain: Cribs."

Six homes? Eight? Ten? Twelve? Well, he earned them. And by "he," I mean Cindy's ancestors.

edit: hoya made his post evidently while I was writing this one. Also, I think that ad was cut during the same time... that really is amazing. Do these guys have time machines?

dajafi wrote:It just occurred to me that if Steve Schmidt and the other Little Roves were running Obama's campaign, we'd be seeing 'round the clock airing of an ad campaign called "John McCain: Cribs."

Six homes? Eight? Ten? Twelve? Well, he earned them. And by "he," I mean Cindy's ancestors.

^^ Like that

I'm just gonna stop, then.

edit: a few more, from Sullivan, before I head out:

McCain, the Untouchable?

A Liberal of Doubt?

New Obama ad

I love how neither side focuses on issues unless it's in the context of accusing the other guy of not focusing on the issues.

Woody wrote:I love how neither side focuses on issues unless it's in the context of accusing the other guy of not focusing on the issues.

like when we took Bakestar to trial over Canklegate