RE: Do You Think Moles (Pro Obama's) Voters Are In The Forums To Slander Palin Because She's A Christian
View related threads:
(in this forum
| in all forums)
|
Logged in as: Guest
|
|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
|
[Poll]
|
Do You Think Moles (Pro Obama's) Voters Are In The Forums To Slander Palin Because She's A Christian
|
| Yes! |
|
| No! |
|
Total Votes : 42
|
(last vote on : 11/23/2008 10:28:24 PM)
(Poll will run till: -- )
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Do You Think Moles (Pro Obama's) Voters Are In The ... - 11/19/2008 4:03:09 PM
|
|
|
Milliecat
Posts: 134
Joined: 11/13/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doorkeeper
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mark328
I'm pro-Obama, but am by no means a mole. I have said some negative things about Sarah Palin, but not because of her beliefs, but because nothing in her speeches indicated she was about change, but about keeping on with what Bush was doing. I believe McCain made a bad choice of running mate, and would have preferred to see Romney with him instead. Had McCain gone with Romney, I'd have voted for McCain..
If McCain chose Romney, at the end of the day the GOP might have won. Having him on the team would have helped significantly when questions of the economic crisis came up.
Palin's choice was a ploy to grab Hillary voters and satisfy Conservatives. McCain's camp had no real confidence in her. They tried to keep her away from the press as much as possible up to the point that it became a problem.
And they did satisfy conservatives. The problem was they threw her to the wolves immediately, meaning Charles Gibson and Katie Couric. It made absolutely no sense when she was brand new to the national stage. I would like to have seen Charlie and Katie's first few weeks on GMA and that other show.
Biden made every mistake possible (Roosevelt talking to the Americans on tv during the depression) and openly saying there would be an "event" after Obama's inauguration and that he wouldn't handle it to the public's liking, but what? The press ignored it.
The double standard throughout the entire campaign was sickening.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Do You Think Moles (Pro Obama's) Voters Are In The ... - 11/19/2008 4:04:55 PM
|
|
|
Milliecat
Posts: 134
Joined: 11/13/2007
Status: online
|
I think there are a few moles still lingering, not to slander Palin but to bother those of us who feel Obama was the wrong choice for moral reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Do You Think Moles (Pro Obama's) Voters Are In The ... - 11/19/2008 5:00:23 PM
|
|
|
Doorkeeper
Posts: 53
Joined: 5/4/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Milliecat
And they did satisfy conservatives. The problem was they threw her to the wolves immediately, meaning Charles Gibson and Katie Couric. It made absolutely no sense when she was brand new to the national stage. I would like to have seen Charlie and Katie's first few weeks on GMA and that other show.
Biden made every mistake possible (Roosevelt talking to the Americans on tv during the depression) and openly saying there would be an "event" after Obama's inauguration and that he wouldn't handle it to the public's liking, but what? The press ignored it.
The double standard throughout the entire campaign was sickening.
There is no double standard. Waiting a month to have the first major interview isn't immediate. They really should have released her for interviews immediately. Even if she would have made the early mistakes they could have told people that they were the natural mistakes of someone coming on the national stage. The press was going to give her a honeymoon period (they always do initially) and they could have used it to define her and her message for the campaign. For example, they could have emphasized her folksy charm earlier, a fresh face who has great judgment on important issues. Together with McCain's experience and character, they make the perfect team. By emphasizing the team, they reduce her inexperience negatives.
Instead they kept her back and the story became she was ducking the national press. By waiting, it only made her look unprepared for the job. In the midst of economic crisis, the last thing you what is someone who appears unprepared (whether or not you think it is true). Mitt's financial background would have connected with more people and would have taken the edge off of Obama's economic attacks and closed the gap between the two teams.
BTW, Biden was a shrewd choice by Obama. His biggest negative was a perceived lack of experience. Biden's choice balanced that out. As far as change goes, Obama makes the final decisions. Regardless of who he has around him, he dictates the agenda and makes the final choices. I don't think anyone believes that things won't change under an Obama presidency.
_____________________________
Doorkeeper
...I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness... - Psa 84:10
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Do You Think Moles (Pro Obama's) Voters Are In The ... - 11/19/2008 10:38:12 PM
|
|
|
Milliecat
Posts: 134
Joined: 11/13/2007
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Doorkeeper
quote:
ORIGINAL: Milliecat
And they did satisfy conservatives. The problem was they threw her to the wolves immediately, meaning Charles Gibson and Katie Couric. It made absolutely no sense when she was brand new to the national stage. I would like to have seen Charlie and Katie's first few weeks on GMA and that other show.
Biden made every mistake possible (Roosevelt talking to the Americans on tv during the depression) and openly saying there would be an "event" after Obama's inauguration and that he wouldn't handle it to the public's liking, but what? The press ignored it.
The double standard throughout the entire campaign was sickening.
There is no double standard. Waiting a month to have the first major interview isn't immediate. They really should have released her for interviews immediately. Even if she would have made the early mistakes they could have told people that they were the natural mistakes of someone coming on the national stage. The press was going to give her a honeymoon period (they always do initially) and they could have used it to define her and her message for the campaign. For example, they could have emphasized her folksy charm earlier, a fresh face who has great judgment on important issues. Together with McCain's experience and character, they make the perfect team. By emphasizing the team, they reduce her inexperience negatives.
Instead they kept her back and the story became she was ducking the national press. By waiting, it only made her look unprepared for the job. In the midst of economic crisis, the last thing you what is someone who appears unprepared (whether or not you think it is true). Mitt's financial background would have connected with more people and would have taken the edge off of Obama's economic attacks and closed the gap between the two teams.
BTW, Biden was a shrewd choice by Obama. His biggest negative was a perceived lack of experience. Biden's choice balanced that out. As far as change goes, Obama makes the final decisions. Regardless of who he has around him, he dictates the agenda and makes the final choices. I don't think anyone believes that things won't change under an Obama presidency.
I know this is off topic so I'll try to respond to this quickly. She had her first interview with Charles Gibson a week and a half to two weeks after the Republican Convention. She was picked at the end of August, therefore, they only had two months to campaign together.
A honeymoon period from the MAINSTREAM press? They are almost all liberals and were trying their best to get Obama elected.
Mitt's financial background would have made it look like it would have been: two rich white men running for the White House. They wouldn't have stood a chance against Obama's mantra of "change". At least Sarah Palin made us excited about this election. I wasn't sure I was going to vote until she was picked as McCain's running mate.
"Perceived" lack of experience? He had less experience than Palin. But he is an elite and she was an outsider. It just goes to show how the media can make candidates and break candidates. And before you bring up W., both times his opponents were weak. This time we had the weaker candidate (popularity-wise) but Palin threatened to change the outcome. She just didn't have enough time and the media was unfair, very unfair. I think that liberals were very threatened by her and that is why they were so mean, especially the left wing blogs.
Anyway, I don't think anyone joining just to post negative comments about Palin would have made any impact anyway. She was a refreshing change and she represented my personal moral values more than any other politician in a long time. I wasn't here at that time, but I think a lot of people here would have defended her.
Oh! I almost forgot! Your last comment? Did you ever say a mouthful. You are absolutely right, except some of us think the changes will be bad for the country.
< Message edited by Milliecat -- 11/19/2008 10:46:11 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Do You Think Moles (Pro Obama's) Voters Are In The ... - 11/20/2008 12:50:43 PM
|
|
|
davemiller7
Posts: 1085
Joined: 3/5/2008
From: NC via NY
Status: offline
|
And this "change" that was the theme of the Obamessiah's campaign ............ Rahm Emmanuel, Tom Daschle, and maybe Hillary Clinton, John Podesta, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, Robert Gates, Lawrence Summers and Paul Volcker? Where's the change? Looks to me like we're going back to "the good old days. Maybe the Obamessiah owes his soul to the machine?
quote:
ORIGINAL: Milliecat
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mark328
I'm pro-Obama, but am by no means a mole. I have said some negative things about Sarah Palin, but not because of her beliefs, but because nothing in her speeches indicated she was about change, but about keeping on with what Bush was doing. I believe McCain made a bad choice of running mate, and would have preferred to see Romney with him instead. Had McCain gone with Romney, I'd have voted for McCain..
Was Biden the choice of "change"? And would Romney be a choice of "change"? And what about Romney would make you change a vote from Obama to McCain?
_____________________________
-Dave
The Prayer of Protection
The light of God surrounds me,
The love of God enfolds me,
The power of God protects me,
The presence of God watches over me.
Wherever I am, God is.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
