Favorite Signs of GOP desperation

The very act itself of picking Palin shows their desperation. They need to get the female vote and evangelical vote. This is pure pandering at it's finest, McCain couldn't even secure the votes of his base, so bring out the religious fundamentalist woman. Doesn't matter, any religious fundamentalist woman will do.

This thread accomplishes nothing but more problems. Can the mods close it please. It was wrong for me to put up and Jaime has done the same in his thread about the liberals.

reply to post by bknapple32


You know, if you're going to do a thread like this, at least post a link supporting the materiality of your examples. (jamie83 should have done the same.)

In any event:

Originally posted by bknapple32
1. McCain now changing the tune of his campaign from experience to change... hmm sounds familiar. change

Your timing is not factual. In fact, who hasn't run on the theme of change in Washington?

For example, as early as the New Hampshire primaries:

The McCain campaign sloughed off the statements, noting that in 2002, when McCain campaigned for Romney, he declared that McCain "has always stood for reform and change."

McCain spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said: "It is laughable that Mitt Romney would think anyone buys his latest act as an agent of change — the only thing he's ever changed are his positions on nearly every important issue. John McCain's record as a reformer and an agent for change in Washington stands second to none."

Source.

I'm fairly confident that if anyone bothered to spend the time, they could find McCain 'need for change' quotes for each of the last three presidential election campaigns.

Originally posted by bknapple32
2. McCain calling Obama an elitist as his wife wears a $300,000 out fit some 20 feet away from him. $300,000 outfit

A Vanity Fair piece was the 'source' for this astonishing (read sarcasm) revelation. What conveniently get's omited is within the same article it states:

(All prices except Laura’s shoes and Cindy’s watch are estimates, and the jewelry prices are based on the assumption that the pieces are real.)

Sorce.

Moreover, there doesn't seem to be any similar criticism or conclusions with respect to Michelle Obama's clothing designer.

Originally posted by bknapple32
3. Didn't McCain say he wasn't going use his POW history to fuel his campaign? not so much anymore. pow

Where did *HE* say this? In the source article you cite, it says:

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) responded

Not McCain.

Moreover, have we arrived at a point in Presidential election politics where mentioning factual information about a candidate's past is wrong?

Talk about putting things on their head.

Complaining about something like this is only relevant if you believe it isn't material to assessing the candidate. But even then, *complaining* isn't really the appropriate response, now is it?

Sounds like this actually cuts the desperation argument in the other direction, if you ask me.

Originally posted by bknapple32
4.Lets call out Obama on inexperience, but balk at people bringing up Palin's. ats page with ref.

Careful, this argument cuts both ways. If you are asserting it's unacceptable to assess Obama's experience, then the best you can do is complain about the hypocrisy of opponents who previously made the inexperience arguement with respect to Obama and now support Palin. But to argue the substantive question is a sort of concession. You can't have it both ways.

Originally posted by bknapple32
5. Distances himself from Bush, yet votes with him 95% of time. Maverick huh? lol looks like Goose to me. mccains voting record

An interesting, but a meaningless statistical trick designed for no other purpose than to mislead.

"...The vast majority of those votes are procedural, and virtually every member of Congress votes with his or her leadership on procedural motions." In fact, Congressional Quarterly's finding that McCain had voted with Bush 90 percent of the time was based on an analysis of "votes where the editors of Congressional Quarterly determined that President Bush had taken a clear position prior to the vote." CQ gave no indication that the "vast majority" of the votes it analyzed to determine presidential support were procedural votes.

Source.

Morever, CQ determines "Presidential Support" in the following manner:

Presidential Support: This analysis uses all votes where the editors of Congressional Quarterly determined that President Bush had taken a clear position prior to the vote. There were 443 such votes in the House during the period (9 percent of the total) and 564 such votes in the Senate (22 percent).

Source.

So in other words, for nearly 80% of the votes, CQ didn't know what the President's position was.

And since you used Biden's number, let's see what you left out:

Biden is guilty of some cherry-picking here.

He is right that McCain voted with the Bush administration 95 percent of the time in 2007, according to an analysis by Congressional Quarterly. But he fails to mention the year, as Obama did when we gave him a True in June, and Biden conveniently leaves out other years when McCain's support for Bush was lower.

...

But other years, McCain's rating was lower. He supported Bush as infrequently as 77 percent of the time in 2005, and backed the president’s position an average of 89 percent of the time since 2001. By congressional standards, that’s solidly partisan, but hardly marching in lockstep.

Source.

Then, there is this:

On the campaign trail, Sen. Barack Obama regularly criticizes President Bush’s “failed policies” and leadership abilities. On the floor of the Senate, however, the freshman from Illinois is much less contrary than his rhetoric would suggest.

..compiled by Congressional Quarterly to note that Obama voted to support President Bush’s positions between 40 and 50 percent of the time over the past two years.

"Can you imagine Obama touting his record of supporting President Bush half the time? Well, it’s true by his numbers,” Rogers said.

...All of which hardly makes Obama a full-blown Bush supporter. But his record also doesn’t put him near the Senate’s top 10 Bush foes...

So if Obama's votes are all ok, then I guess we get to ignore at least 50% of McCain's votes where Obama agreed with him.

And finally, it seems to me that what is a far more significant measure of a candidate is what substantive issues they opposed their party on.

Here's McCain's voting record where he voted against his own party: Take a look.

Originally posted by bknapple32
6.Obama is from Kenya??? lololol

I agree. It's ridiculous. But it's not hard to understand where it came from:

Originally posted by bknapple32
7. Obama is a muslim? lololol

Same as above.

Originally posted by bknapple32
8. Making fun of Obama's set up for his DNC speech, yet couldnt really attack the actual speech itself. GOP pokes fun

I'm a little confused how you arrived at this conclusion with the source article you cite:

The McCain campaign is poking fun at the Greek temple-like stage for Barack Obama’s big speech tonight at Invesco Field.

So of course they didn't criticize the speach. It hadn't happened yet.

Are you seriously suggesting there weren't subsequent meaningful criticisms of Obama's speech AFTER it was given????

:shk:

Originally posted by bknapple32
9. Repubs say Hillary should act like a big boy is shes gonna play with the big boys, but then cry foul when Palin is called out. ats page with refrences to this

Other than "Slick" (an obvious exception and for obvious reasons), I don't recall her being attacked by proxy with respect to her family members. Moreover, there are MANY who are not Hilary supporters who found the sexist treatment of her campaign dispicable-- myself included.

In the few instances where Chelsey (an active campaigner for Hilary) was attacked, Democrats became unglued. So what was that about crying foul?

Originally posted by bknapple32
10. Straight talk express has a passenger who wont comply. Palin wont answer any questions from reporters.. EVER. palin wont answer

"EVER"?

Where is your link for this?

Originally posted by bknapple32
11. Obama is part of the Bildergerg Group....? lol. ats page

I hadn't realized a conspiracy thread written on ATS by a user with the name jamie83 represents all "Republicans", let alone their desperation.

----

I really shouldn't have bothered with the time it took to reply to this thread. But honestly people, can we all get a grip?

If there is evidence of desperation, it can be conveniently found within *THIS* specific thread...

[edit on 6-9-2008 by loam]

(Continuing....)

Let's agree to fight the NONSENSE with SUBSTANCE...not more nonsense. Please.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by loam]

(oops wrong thread...sorry.)

Too many damned windows open.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by loam]

So, Jamie's topic, which in the end has no links, proof, just "Obama's black! It's the White House not the Monkey House! BLACK!!!"

But this one, with links, and proof to every thing he says... And he's attacked? What? He actually puts up links and proof, and is attacked. Jamie pretty much gets the reach around from all his Neocon buddies because he screams Obama is black and a "secret muslim". Yeah, fair and balanced here...