Pakin MIA

[del]

Turns out she was at an Irish pub.

dcon, explain how what I said was sexist.

well, so was I, small world innit?

 

[DiveCon]

Turns out she was at an Irish pub.

dcon, explain how what I said was sexist.

a woman suffering from vapors?
you dont see how that is sexist?

 

[Ravi]

a woman suffering from vapors?
you dont see how that is sexist?

Nope. Feel free to explain it. IMO, McCain is suffering from them, too, if that makes you feel any better. But I am at a total loss as to why my pointing this out is sexist.

 

[Ravi]

well, so was I, small world innit?

But were you campaigning?

Nice spin, btw.

 

[DiveCon]

Nope. Feel free to explain it. IMO, McCain is suffering from them, too, if that makes you feel any better. But I am at a total loss as to why my pointing this out is sexist.

you gotta be kidding me

well, please contact the Obama/Biden campaign and insist Biden use that in the debate against Palin

 

[frazzledgear]

actually, we are laughing at Obamas pick



but, he does seem to like the Villages

For the life of me I have not been able to figure out why Obama chose this guy at all. There are any one of three major reasons to choose a VP -which may or may not overlap in any one person but even one of which is considered a valid reason to consider their choice for VP.

First possible reason to pick someone is because the guy is popular in his own state and increases the odds of winning a state a Presidential candidate really needs to win. Not the case with Biden -Obama was always going to win the teeny state of Delaware with or without Biden.

Second possible reason is because the guy fills a void in expertise that the Presidential candidate lacks -such as having executive experience in government if the Presidential candidate does not have any or national level experience if the candidate doesn't. Obama thinks Biden's lengthier time as an overpaid Senator from the same level of government and identical branch fills some kind of void and helps make up for the fact he hasn't even been Senator long enough for people to know if he can handle that job well. It actually emphasizes and highlights the expertise he is already missing -executive experience. Because now both are missing it. In addition, Biden wasn't particularly popular or well known outside of Washington, even when running for President during the Democrat primaries - so Obama didn't even bring a more impressive name recognition to his ticket with Biden.

Third possible reason is to pick someone who is successful and known within another level of government AND a different branch of government. If the Presidential candidate is a governor, he will usually pick a Senator with a decent reputation as Senator (and preferably one who is at least very popular in his own state and if from a state he needs to win, even better) -and this insures a better level of national party support. If he is a Senator, will usually pick a governor. A Senator Presidential candidate choosing his VP from state level government opens up a more enthusiastic level of party support beyond simply sharing the same national party lable. State party politics are independent of national party politics in some significant ways. And with the Democrat Party in particular, state level political parties too often feel slighted or even belittled by their national party. So picking the right person from state level of government usually provides a bigger level of enthusiasm by state level party workers. You NEVER see a governor running for President choose another governor for VP -and ideally you wouldn't see a Senator choose another Senator either. The ones who consistently choose two Senators for the ticket are Democrats (which I think contributes to the fact they lost more Presidential races in the last 50 years or so than they have been able to win. Even subconsciously voters know there is something unfulfilling with such a ticket.) The Democrats who did win -without exception for decades now - followed this formula of not putting two people from the same level and same branch of government on the ticket.

Historically, the most successful Presidential tickets are those who combine a Washington insider with an outsider -and not two insiders. I can't find an example of two Senators on the ticket that was EVER elected -but they sure haven't been for at least the last 100 years. How many failed tickets of two Senators who haven't gotten elected do you need to see before getting the idea that maybe two Senators on the ticket is actually a handicap and not a plus after all?

Good thing Democrats believe history has nothing to teach them though and like their faith in proven failed policies, believe that trying it just one more time will work the magic, huh? Hope they don't mess around with their loser formula for picking a VP anytime in the future either. Republicans follow the winning formula more consistently and every time one didn't, he always lost his bid for the White House too. And always lost to a Democrat who DID follow that formula.

And what was Obama thinking by picking THIS particular Senator anyway? This is the same guy who sabotaged his own bid for President by referring to Obama as "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." What the heck does that mean? That there have been no other mainstream African-Americans who weren't dirty, unattractive and couldn't put two sentences together? (Very revealing about the inherent paternalistic racism I firmly believe is at the heart of the Democrat Party anyway.) Just imagine the UPROAR that would still be going on now if a Republican had said this though. The difference is -this isn't something that would cross their mind to be an appropriate statement to EVER say in the first place, but certainly not while running for President! This would be used as all the "proof" needed that ALL Republicans are racists. While it ends up no big deal and certainly didn't prevent that guy from being on the same ticket with Obama even after insulting an entire race! The fact Biden is still sticking his foot in his mouth shouldn't be a surprise to anyone -but apparently it sure is to Obama.

 

[DavidS]

So the media is boycotting Palin, but when they invite her, she better show up or else?

Believe me! The media is NOT boycotting Palin. Any network would DIE to do an interview with her right now about what she thought about the debate. Hell, put her on foxnews and throw her softball questions... throw her on meet the press, do SOMETHING... her absense is unpresidented and unpresidential.

 

[Ravi]

you gotta be kidding me

well, please contact the Obama/Biden campaign and insist Biden use that in the debate against Palin

Nice deflection.

It's too bad you can't explain why you think making a joke about someone's fortitude is sexist.

 

[DiveCon]

Nice deflection.

It's too bad you can't explain why you think making a joke about someone's fortitude is sexist.

no, i'm serious, you dont think thats sexist, please, PLEASE contact the Obama/Biden campaign and have them run with that

 

[Jennifer.Bush]

The only loose cannon has been Biden sticking his foot in his mouth nearly every other day -perhaps Obama should put HIM under wraps for a while.

As for insisting Palin is totally unqualified -your just plain nuts. Obama with just 18 months as Senator before declaring for the Presidency is THE singlemost unqualified Presidential candidate in over a century. That should bother you a whole lot more than whining about a governor going for a lower office.

But governors are ALWAYS qualified to run for President OR VP. Unless you want to explain what made a governor from a hick state like Arkansas with zero foreign policy experience -qualified to run for President. Think something big was going in Arkansas that Clinton had to deal with magically gave him any more qualifications to hold the top job in the world than Palin has for VP? Or how about Carter the peanut farmer from rural Georgia who became governor before running for President. Think anything about being a governor of that state which has little in common with Washington, DC left him more qualified for President? BOTH were total unknowns when they first decided to run and both from states not known for being "cosmopolitan" either. (Other things left Carter unqualified, but not the fact he had been governor.) How about Ronald Reagan whose resume was "actor, President of the Screen Actor's Guild and governor" -think that left him far more qualified for the most powerful job in the world than Palin is for VP?

To insist that governors aren't qualified to even be VP makes a lie out of our entire history. There is absolutely NOTHING unusual about Palin's resume that makes her more unqualified for VP than if Obama had chosen Kathleen Sebelius, governor of KS as his VP -who was on his short list. Would that mean SHE would have been unqualified for VP too - or just THIS governor? And only because her party affiliation is one you don't like?

More governors have been VP than any other previous elected office and roughly half of all Presidents were too. In fact, 4 out of the last 5 Presidents were GOVERNORS and some from states that were no less distanced politically from Washington DC than Alaska is. Personally, I don't WANT or like seeing a President AND VP combined to be nothing more than the same old Washington insiders doing business as usual. You think that is a necessary qualification -I think it goes into the "negative" column myself and always will.

damnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

 

[Caligirl]

For the life of me I have not been able to figure out why Obama chose this guy at all.

White working class votes in swing states. Period.

(Being catholic doesn't hurt. and neither does foreign policy credentials.)

 

[WillowTree]

Who the Hell is Pakin??

 

[Caligirl]

This is the same guy who sabotaged his own bid for President by referring to Obama as "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." What the heck does that mean?

It means Obama was a real breath of fresh air in the political atmosphere of late 2006/early 2007.

The political atmosphere in 2006 was old boy cronyism, indictments of abramoff etc, corruption, war, the probability of more clinton years to drag on the bush-clinton-bush-clinton trend, sex scandals (pages and minneapiolis airports), It was tired and old and no end in sight to the train wreck we were on.

Obama gives the choice of a different trainwreck. And yeah, he is nice looking in that Huckstable sort of way.

 

[frazzledgear]

this is totally bizarre.

last night, Biden was like a junkyard attack dog, showing up everywhere, and on every network, to defend his boss.

Palin was totally AWOL, even though the networks begged her to appear to spin for her boss.

Why doesn't the GOP even trust Palin, the alleged pitbull with lipstick, to defend her own boss on one of the most important nights of the campaign season?

Maybe you all forgot, but McCain suspended his campaign -which included having the VP out there rooting on McCain. (Not as if no one knew what she would have said here anyway.) There have been no campaign-related appearances by either McCain or Palin except for McCain showing up for the debate and then immediately returning to Washington.

 

[DavidS]

Maybe you all forgot, but McCain suspended his campaign -which included having the VP out there rooting on McCain. (Not as if no one knew what she would have said here anyway.) There have been no campaign-related appearances by either McCain or Palin except for McCain showing up for the debate and then immediately returning to Washington.

McCain never suspended his campaign frazz. I mean, you can believe that if you wish, you can also believe in santa clause and the tooth fairy.

FACT: McCain never pulled his ads from TV
FACT: McCain's website remained up accepting donations
FACT: Even though a deal wasn't officially reached this morning, McCain was on THIS WEEK this morning.

When someone suspends their campaign, they don't accept donations, they give up their delegates and they don't keep commercials on the air attacking their opponent.

 

[xsited1]

this is totally bizarre.

last night, Biden was like a junkyard attack dog, showing up everywhere, and on every network, to defend his boss.

Palin was totally AWOL, even though the networks begged her to appear to spin for her boss.

Why doesn't the GOP even trust Palin, the alleged pitbull with lipstick, to defend her own boss on one of the most important nights of the campaign season?

Women don't belong in politics. I'm glad the two major parties have established that.

 

[Chris]

For the life of me I have not been able to figure out why Obama chose this guy at all. There are any one of three major reasons to choose a VP -which may or may not overlap in any one person but even one of which is considered a valid reason to consider their choice for VP.

First possible reason to pick someone is because the guy is popular in his own state and increases the odds of winning a state a Presidential candidate really needs to win. Not the case with Biden -Obama was always going to win the teeny state of Delaware with or without Biden.

Second possible reason is because the guy fills a void in expertise that the Presidential candidate lacks -such as having executive experience in government if the Presidential candidate does not have any or national level experience if the candidate doesn't. Obama thinks Biden's lengthier time as an overpaid Senator from the same level of government and identical branch fills some kind of void and helps make up for the fact he hasn't even been Senator long enough for people to know if he can handle that job well. It actually emphasizes and highlights the expertise he is already missing -executive experience. Because now both are missing it. In addition, Biden wasn't particularly popular or well known outside of Washington, even when running for President during the Democrat primaries - so Obama didn't even bring a more impressive name recognition to his ticket with Biden.

Third possible reason is to pick someone who is successful and known within another level of government AND a different branch of government. If the Presidential candidate is a governor, he will usually pick a Senator with a decent reputation as Senator (and preferably one who is at least very popular in his own state and if from a state he needs to win, even better) -and this insures a better level of national party support. If he is a Senator, will usually pick a governor. A Senator Presidential candidate choosing his VP from state level government opens up a more enthusiastic level of party support beyond simply sharing the same national party lable. State party politics are independent of national party politics in some significant ways. And with the Democrat Party in particular, state level political parties too often feel slighted or even belittled by their national party. So picking the right person from state level of government usually provides a bigger level of enthusiasm by state level party workers. You NEVER see a governor running for President choose another governor for VP -and ideally you wouldn't see a Senator choose another Senator either. The ones who consistently choose two Senators for the ticket are Democrats (which I think contributes to the fact they lost more Presidential races in the last 50 years or so than they have been able to win. Even subconsciously voters know there is something unfulfilling with such a ticket.) The Democrats who did win -without exception for decades now - followed this formula of not putting two people from the same level and same branch of government on the ticket.

Historically, the most successful Presidential tickets are those who combine a Washington insider with an outsider -and not two insiders. I can't find an example of two Senators on the ticket that was EVER elected -but they sure haven't been for at least the last 100 years. How many failed tickets of two Senators who haven't gotten elected do you need to see before getting the idea that maybe two Senators on the ticket is actually a handicap and not a plus after all?

Good thing Democrats believe history has nothing to teach them though and like their faith in proven failed policies, believe that trying it just one more time will work the magic, huh? Hope they don't mess around with their loser formula for picking a VP anytime in the future either. Republicans follow the winning formula more consistently and every time one didn't, he always lost his bid for the White House too. And always lost to a Democrat who DID follow that formula.

And what was Obama thinking by picking THIS particular Senator anyway? This is the same guy who sabotaged his own bid for President by referring to Obama as "the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy." What the heck does that mean? That there have been no other mainstream African-Americans who weren't dirty, unattractive and couldn't put two sentences together? (Very revealing about the inherent paternalistic racism I firmly believe is at the heart of the Democrat Party anyway.) Just imagine the UPROAR that would still be going on now if a Republican had said this though. The difference is -this isn't something that would cross their mind to be an appropriate statement to EVER say in the first place, but certainly not while running for President! This would be used as all the "proof" needed that ALL Republicans are racists. While it ends up no big deal and certainly didn't prevent that guy from being on the same ticket with Obama even after insulting an entire race! The fact Biden is still sticking his foot in his mouth shouldn't be a surprise to anyone -but apparently it sure is to Obama.

Obama picked Biden because he liked him personally, and he would make a good president. Obama was thinking about the good of the country as well as his own personal feelings.

 

[Ravi]

Maybe you all forgot, but McCain suspended his campaign -which included having the VP out there rooting on McCain. (Not as if no one knew what she would have said here anyway.) There have been no campaign-related appearances by either McCain or Palin except for McCain showing up for the debate and then immediately returning to Washington.

It's amazing how you've managed to rewrite history. McCain pretended to suspend his campaign so he could get out of the debate.