I'll ~~ agree on that last

Post #298,817 by Ashton 11/2/08 7:33:09 PM Reply	I'll ~~ agree on that last But.. do you not think that Obama is intelligent enough Not to repeat the mistakes of every pol before -- who has watched MEGO (my eyes ...) whenever addressing those Devils-in-details: to which you refer? ie. Our System of expectations beyond sane-possibility and debates without substance Guarantees that, it only Can Be that: you find out after-election the probity and perspicuity (or not.) Why would you expect THIS election's 'dialogue' to have been an order/magnitue better? I didn't. And it hasn't. But even with these childish rules, the dumbing down to fit diffident occasional-voters, mostly of the totally-uninformed stripe: Obama has said very little that could be called duplicitous (precisely counter to his actual intentions) - something we cannot know til he Does something, in office. OTOH, McC's performance has been as crazy opines: he neither knows nor cares, apparently -- and he appears to mirror Shrub in dogged stubbornness, combined with Shrub's Label, "..the most incurious person I've met." I agree that Obama has omitted much that you (and I) would require to know about; unlike you, I believe I know why -- he had Better Not-have gone into much more detail (he tried that, as I recall - though not the venue.) He also noticed the pulse-o-meters going down, when he did. (Think, for ex: Saddleback and McC's parroted evangel 5 word replies, "begins at conception", and the other canned replies.) Obama tried to bring some perspective to the formulated black/white expected answers, and was deemed "evasive" for the effort! THAT is the Murica in which these two are competing. To too-many Muricans, elite == smarter == Bad. Ignore that factoid and be HHH or Adlai. Rest case.
Post #298,821 by beepster 11/2/08 7:46:41 PM Reply	Your rose colored glasses you like one's message more than the others. McCain hasn't done anything surprising..but everything has been spun very well in support of the opposing message. No rep candidate had a real shot at this election...I'm surprised its stayed within 10 points. In that, I'd say McCain has done at least a few things right. (just not right by you).
Post #298,856 by Ashton 11/3/08 12:04:35 AM Reply	McC has not been just 'irregular' in his performance - he's been irregularly-irregular. And vague; that is, the kind of vagueness which leaves you to a black/white coin-flip decision: either he knows and just won't say how he will fix X? or he hasn't a clue. "Like one's message" -???- W.T.F. does That mean? Of Course I 'like' the one who makes more sense to my ears and experience VS the one who makes less sense. {Sheesh} And yes, I Am influenced by the candidate's ability to give sufficent specifics to work with, to do so consistently (on any topic) and to not substitute slogans for every question he can't or won't respond to. "Done nothing surprising" -- how about Sarah? especially given his health status and prognosis. And all that implies. En fin: perhaps Obama will not deliver (whether via financial chaos consequences or from personal inability.) But IME - McCain lacks the ability and temperament (as well as any well-thought plan I've heard from him) - simply, he can't 'deliver'. And you can't estimate what he Is promising, because it's mostly vague crowd-pleasing slogans, bereft of any back-up material indicating whether he (or anyone in his ever-altering fubar-ed campaign) has done the slightest homework. Insufficient evidence: that's all we ever get, in any event. I'll go with the even-tempered smart one in this case, not the one who wants to freeze all spending and extend the tenets of GWB, with the Damocles sword of Palin hanging over us all, every sunrise. Call it Risk Management. Oh and: It's "stayed within 10 points" because we have a lackluster, diffident uninformed zoo, masquerading as citizens. HTH
Post #298,858 by beepster 11/3/08 1:09:43 AM Reply	Yep your guy had all the right substance and the other guy only has as much support for his views because his supporters are stupid. that about sum it up?
Post #298,859 by Ashton 11/3/08 5:37:30 AM Reply	That our voters are ill-informed is a given Does the sun go around the Earth? Can you show where Iraq, Afghanistan are on a globe, map, whatever? Then there's this: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24589641-2702,00.html "What's the G20?'' (President stumper) qed Our election rituals reflect that low level of expectations and the dumbing-down which renders the questions insipid and the answers slogans. If you ran Jack the Ripper against anyone - it would still be close (especially if Jack could play a guitar, made a lot of B-movies, and was pretty.) (Having Found God may not be a sole criterion, for a while - only because the last one who made it on that sole qualification ... etc. Maybe in a couple weeks though? by which time many will have forgotten.)
Post #298,863 by crazy 11/3/08 7:41:51 AM Reply	Anybody who votes from belief not fact is stupid Anyone. Any side. And if not stupid, then personal blinds spots that cause stupid statements or behaviour. Those that blindly believe anyone, no matter what the basis (religion, world view, call by authority, etc), without being able to explain why, in rational terms, without falling back on an "undisputable" truth that is not subject to a factual analysis is an idiot. And yes, I know the next step would be to point out things like theoretical reasons for global warming are subject to debate. And at that point, it is a matter of choosing your experts. When the vast majority of experts lean one way or another, I'll tend to believe (yes, here comes a bit of belief) that majority in that area. Not the majority of people, but the majority of people in a particular field with actual qualifications to make a judgement, since I'm not qualified to actually judge.
Post #298,873 by beepster 11/3/08 10:49:56 AM Reply	So, then the majority of Obama supporters are stupid too...as when asked about his accomplishments nearly all cannot name one single piece of legislation. Instead, we got "Jesus was a community organizer". There are no facts in politics. If we go on facts, both candidates fail...miserably.
Post #298,881 by crazy 11/3/08 12:32:22 PM Reply	Nope Because certain core philosophies are enough to push you one way or the other. I can be pretty sure McCain will be causing damage to things that I care about. His stated goals are definetaly in opposition to mine, at least in a couple of areas I really want addressed. I can't be sure what Obama will do, but I generally agree with his stated philosophy, and he's smart enough that I don't worry about him doing anything exceptionally stupid. This is based on the facts I am aware of at a very high level. Their day to day actions show plenty. Maybe it's all bullshit, since Obama has spent a life of being very careful what he says. He can argue both side of almost every argument, and make people think he agrees with them, simply because he is capable of expressing each side of the argument in terms the believers agree with. This might be slimy politician to you. To me, it is an example of someone who tries to think through all sides of an argument before coming to a decision.
Post #298,889 by beepster 11/3/08 2:00:52 PM Reply	So is it really facts? You seem to be supporting someone by default because you don't like his opponent. That doesn't necessarily jive with what you said before. Not that its not a perfectly valid reason...just that its not supporting someone based on facts...its opposing someone based on facts. I'm sure there are equally many people that are doing the same with McCain. Alot of folks don't want to see their taxes rise, don't think people that pay no taxes should get tax credits, don't want estate taxes reinstated, etc. Most of these folks likely would have picked McCain as their first choice...but their fundamental disagreement with Obama has put them there...just like you. That doesn't make them stupid, as you claim
Post #298,912 by crazy 11/3/08 8:17:17 PM 11/3/08 8:32:09 PM Reply	You obviously didn't read my post ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Those that blindly believe anyone, no matter what the basis (religion, world view, call by authority, etc), without being able to explain why, in rational terms, without falling back on an "undisputable" truth that is not subject to a factual analysis is an idiot. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- You gave perfectly reasonable points of disagreement. While they may not mesh with mine, it doesn't mean they were arrived at stupidly. But: The Palin base? Those that were sitting out until she showed up? Morons that want to be lied to. Also, I said: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- His stated goals are definetaly in opposition to mine, at least in a couple of areas I really want addressed. I can't be sure what Obama will do, but I generally agree with his stated philosophy, and he's smart enough that I don't worry about him doing anything exceptionally stupid. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- There are a couple of areas that affect me personally. I want my doctor free to prescribe anything he thinks is appropriate for me. I'm on a lot of drugs for EDS, drugs with dangerous side effects that will kill me, painfully, sooner or later. Not might, will. Uncurable bleeding ulcers are the NORMAL result of what I'm on. I can cut out most of them if smoke 2 hits of pot each night. With a stroke of a pen, Obama can direct the DEA to leave medical pot alone. He's already stated his position. Let the states decide. While NJ doesn't have it, it might in a few years under Obama. If not, I'll move. Under MCCain, we can expect the feds to tighten the screws, and I might have nowhere to move to. Edited by crazy Nov. 3, 2008, 08:32:09 PM EST Expand All History

Welcome to IWETHEY!