American Presidential Election 2008

[Capernicus]

I don't want this thread to be about anything happening in particular, but more as a case study of what has happened thus far and speculation on what will happen. My stand on this may change as the year wears on, so I hope this thread doesn't get lost in misc.

First, if you plan on posting you should read this, or at the very least skim my experts.

The Republican Party has chosen John McCain, the senior United States Senator from Arizona as its nominee; Barack Obama, the junior United States Senator from Illinois, has been chosen as the nominee for the Democratic Party. The 2008 election is particularly notable because it is the first time in U.S. history that two sitting senators will run against each other for president, and because it is the first time an African American is a presidential nominee for a major party, as well as the first time both major candidates were born outside the continental United States - Hawaii for Obama and the Canal Zone in Panama for McCain. With African-AmericanCaucasian parentage, as the Democratic Party nominee for President and John McCain's selection of female Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as the Republican Party nominee for Vice-President, the eventual winning ticket is virtually assured of having a historic context. Barring unforeseen events, this will be the first time in American history in which a candidate on the winning ticket is either a woman or an African American.

The 2008 election marks the first time since the 1928 election in which neither an incumbent President nor an incumbent Vice President ran for their party's nomination in the presidential election,[1] and the first time since the 1952 election that neither the incumbent President nor incumbent Vice President is a candidate in the general election. The incumbent President, George W. Bush, is serving his second term and is barred from running again by the term limits in the 22nd Amendment to the United States Constitution. Vice President Dick Cheney has chosen not to seek the presidency.

The nominees for the major party nominations were both serving United States Senators: Republican candidate John McCain (Arizona) and Democratic candidate Barack Obama (Illinois). It is the first time in history that the two main opponents in the general election are both sitting Senators.[5] Therefore, it appears virtually certain that the 2008 election will mark the first time since the election of John F. Kennedy in 1960 that a sitting Senator will be elected President of the United States, and only the third time ever in American history, after John F. Kennedy and Warren G. Harding. Obama's running mate, Joe Biden of Delaware, is also a sitting senator.

In an op-ed published on April 27, 2008 in The New York Times, Elizabeth Edwards bemoaned that the media covered much more of "the rancor of the campaign" and "amount of money spent" than "the candidates' priorities, policies and principles". She went on to compare much of the media coverage to a soap opera and stated that, as result, "voters who take their responsibility to be informed seriously enough to search out information about the candidates are finding it harder and harder to do so, particularly if they do not have access to the Internet". Edwards continued, "an informed electorate is essential to freedom itself. But as long as corporations to which news gathering is not the primary source of income or expertise get to decide what information about the candidates 'sells,' we are not functioning as well as we could if we had the engaged, skeptical press we deserve". Edwards stated that what was worse is that trends hold out dim hope that the quality of media coverage will improve, stating that "media consolidation is leading to one-size-fits-all journalism." Worst of all, she said, poor media coverage "gives us permission to ignore issues and concentrate on things that don’t matter"




*cough* Now that you have done that, let's talk. The way Clinton and Obama went about their campaigns really DID remind me of a soap opera. They went for the jugular on things of little importance to the issues at hand. It was ridiculous. They had the Democratic Party so divided that it's no surprise to me that McCain decided to capitalize on it and pick a female running mate. Studies show that the running VP has little to no effect on the Presidential Candidate's chances. I think he hoped to snag all the female votes for the Democratic Party, personally, and he could have done a much better job at hiding that was what he was doing. I mean, Palin is the Governor of ALASKA of all places. Not even the continental US.

Truly, this election is going to be very historic because it will mean either an Afican American or a woman in office (even if it's only VP). And, less importantly, because neither the former president nor former vice president is running again, it's all senators.

And what of the issues at hand? Of course, the war in Iraq, unemployment rates, the deficit, gay marriage, illegal immigration, and so much more. I confess I don't even know the candidates' stances on the issues!

And besides all of this, I was really surprised that Guiliani did not make the ballot, though not so much about Romney. McCain ninjaed the candidacy from the NY Senator, quite a feat. I remember how people were laughing him out of the race back when it was the three of them. You can't deny his POW record, he truly is a hero. I think that story is being overused though. And Obama's "Change we can count on" is running a little thin too.

But, all in all, from the chart it would seem that Obama is leading the race. I was under the impression that Obama's articulating skills towered over McCain's, and that he would be the favorite. He is still in the lead, but not by much it seems. Maybe that will only come once the celebs really start rallying the college students to vote.

[Haoie]

Kind of moot, seeing as most members aren't old enough to vote, or don't care about politics, or don't live in the states.

As a non US citizen, I can say that about the worst thing for America's image right now is another 4 years of republicans.

The whole world outside of America [and yes, we do exist] collectively facepalmed when Bushy got another term. Don't make us do it again.

[Sanosuke23]

To be perfectly honest, I'm one of those little purple triangles still. Obama may be charismatic and he may be promising change, but his acceptance speech keeps nagging at me. How can he say he wants both sides to start behaving as Americans first and Democrats/Republicans second but in the SAME EXACT SPEECH say that McCain isn't like "us," and so he should lose? Sounds hypocritical to me.

On the other hand, despite Sarah Palin's record of being tough on corruption and unnecessary spending, she's nuts.

[TheAsterisk!]

Palin wasn't chosen just because McCain needed more women's votes, she was also chosen to try to rectify his "old man McCain" image. I'd also ask everyone to read the chart on their own. The red line is slightly higher than the blue line. McCain is actually ahead by a sliver according to that graph. It looks about 47% to 45%, so they may as well be dead tied.

Haoie, when have Americans ever cared what other countries think? Bush was the perfect embodiment of the US. He was from Texas, spoke poorly, had a funny face and annoyed other countries. That alone could've got the man elected president, even if so many are afraid to admit it. We love to run around professing superiority and laugh at our countries of origin. We painstakingly carved Teddy Roosevelt's head into a mountain for goodness sake! If ever we had a gruff imperialist in charge it was him. I don't know why we do this, but it seems to be a standard. We're probably just enjoying our power for a few centuries before another great nation takes our place.
It seems to me we're just kooky people, regardless of party.

What I want to bring up is controversial and may eventually be forced into the pay-to-post forum if too many people get excited.
I say this is undoubtedly the most racist and sexist presidential campaign in the last fifty years. Let's examine why I might make such a claim.
"Racism" is a word composed of the word "race" and the suffix "-ism." The definition of "race should be pretty clear, and "-ism" means "doctrine." A doctrine is a set of beliefs/principles or a policy. Thus, racism is race based belief or policy. To simplify that further, if something is defined by race or is race based, it is then racist. Sexism is similar, albeit with regard to gender rather than ethnicity.
1 - Barack Obama has no distinguishing characteristics as a candidate for president apart from others in his party than that he is black. He espouses the Democratic platform without original thought.* He runs on the fact that he is a black man with a vague claim of change tacked on as an afterthought. Race defines his campaign.
2 - Hillary Clinton had no special traits other than that she is a woman. She espouses the Democratic platform without original thought.* She ran on the fact that she was a woman. Gender defined her campaign.
3 - Palin is in a similar fix to Clinton, but was also chosen because of her comparative youth. She espouses the given platform with little original thought.* She was chosen because she is a woman and is young. Gender and age define her part in McCain's campaign.
I see it as undeniably that this race (no pun intended) is racist. Every time the "historical significance" of the mess is brought up solely because a black man and a woman are involved, racism shows itself. Race should have absolutely no bearing on any of it, but it seems like race has somehow inserted itself into every miniscule issue in this race.
I leave it to others to say who, what or what force/group has made this race so racist. Is it the candidates? The parties? The media? Something else?


*Please note that I think neither Biden nor McCain have original thoughts, either. This election is absurdly bland.

[ai_frostbite]

obama's young, and looks promising, i say lets give him a chance...
lets not go republican...

[Capernicus]

It's true, the country (at least as it seems to me) is so inherently anti Republican. I hear, quite more often, that McCain is too stupid to get elected. But he's winning, and I can't understand why. I do agree that Obama certainly is the more charismatic candidate (even if you say he's ordinary), but apart from that I only know that he is a supporter of human rights (ie pro gay marriage). And, from Mp2K's sig, I gather that McCain is a fiscal conservative. I know it was the purpose of the cartoon to do so, but it makes me awfully worried about a deficit.



As for you, Asterisk, I hadn't thought of Palin in terms of age. I did know that she was young and pretty hot (for a politician), but I think you're right. I think we are both right.

Did you see Obama's speech yesterday? He made a fairly controversial statement that was a direct reference to Palin. During her speech at the Rupublican National Convention, she made a joke something along the lines of "You know the difference betweena hockey mom and a bulldog? Lipstick." And then Obama compares her to a pig.

+ YouTube Video

(that's not working, so )

Truly, this campaign is about the real issues least of all.

[Diocletian]

If only Lou Dobbs were involved.....
I'll give Obama the cookie for having charisma and passion for it.
McCain won't even lift up his hands to do the wave.
Stewart Alexander has a nice face.He should be running.
My opinion doesn't matter.I'm 15.

[TheAsterisk!]

It's true, the country (at least as it seems to me) is so inherently anti Republican. I hear, quite more often, that McCain is too stupid to get elected. But he's winning, and I can't understand why.

I know! It's weird. The whole country is dying to give Democrats all of Congress and yet McCain still ties Obama. I haven't figured out why it should be so yet, nor has anyone else as far as I know.

I do agree that Obama certainly is the more charismatic candidate (even if you say he's ordinary), but apart from that I only know that he is a supporter of human rights (ie pro gay marriage).

'Kay. That's right along party platforms as I said.

And, from Mp2K's sig, I gather that McCain is a fiscal conservative. I know it was the purpose of the cartoon to do so, but it makes me awfully worried about a deficit.

Yeah, yeah, I've seen MP2K's signature. He is to the Republican Party what I am to the Green Party.
I wish you hadn't brought that up. The thread may be turned on its head.
The deficit does little more than add to the national debt, and the national debt is completely inconsequential unless/until we cease to be a major military power with WMDs. A debt has no meaning domestically unless someone can make you pay it back. No one has done that for over two hundred years. A lot of our debt is due the French, left over from the revolutionary war. If you want to make the debt a real issue and not just political ammunition, there has to be a nation wiling to force us, militarily, to pay them back. I honestly doubt it will happen. Any internal debts are basically nonexistent. If you, as a minor, had money hungry parents that demanded you lend them money, you could never really force them to pay it back as far as practicality is concerned. The national debt (and the budget deficit) are just political issues based on the misguided notion that the government has to balance a checkbook like a family does. We can spend all we want with no economic impact. The problem arises not because it it a bad idea in itself, but because, thanks to that political posturing I just mentioned, people tend to perceive it as a bad idea. Our economy doesn't run on reality, it runs on perception of reality and knee-jerk reactions. A beautiful example of this is when a company falls short of projected profits but still makes profits and even makes more than in previous years. The more emotional investors usually turn "more profit than ever but less than anticipated" into "LOSS! Oh, dear God, help me! We're all gonna die! Arrgg!!!" and put the company in trouble. The same reason could (not definite, but possible) make oil prices drop if projects to begin drilling began, even if the supply was years away. Knee-jerk idiocy and ignorance run most of Wall Street and goes on to greatly affect the economy as a whole.

As for you, Asterisk, I hadn't thought of Palin in terms of age. I did know that she was young and pretty hot (for a politician), but I think you're right. I think we are both right.

Then let us bask in each other's brilliance!

Did you see Obama's speech yesterday? He made a fairly controversial statement that was a direct reference to Palin. During her speech at the Rupublican National Convention, she made a joke something along the lines of "You know the difference betweena hockey mom and a bulldog? Lipstick." And then Obama compares her to a pig.

I didn't see it, but I heard about it. Most sources seem to agree on what happened (if not the interpretation), so I think I've got a good picture. Obama apparently used a colloquialism (though I'd never heard of it) that was politically unwise. Fine diction, bad politics, something like "Mission Accomplished" was but much, much smaller. It'll fade away within a few days.

Truly, this campaign is about the real issues least of all.

The candidates are defined by their parties' platforms, but people get sick of the same pitch after a decade or two. So, they decided to liven things up. I can't say it's surprising, though it is trashy.
At least no one's been accused of being a prostitute yet like Andrew Jackson's wife was during his 5+ year long campaign.

McCain won't even lift up his hands to do the wave.

I hope that was a joke. The man's shoulders were torn apart when he was in Hanoi. That's the one time his POW stories have some relevance, and you disregarded it. Please be informed next time.

[Capernicus]

I wish you hadn't brought that up. The thread may be turned on its head.
The deficit does little more than add to the national debt, and the national debt is completely inconsequential unless/until we cease to be a major military power with WMDs. A debt has no meaning domestically unless someone can make you pay it back. No one has done that for over two hundred years. A lot of our debt is due the French, left over from the revolutionary war. If you want to make the debt a real issue and not just political ammunition, there has to be a nation wiling to force us, militarily, to pay them back. I honestly doubt it will happen. Any internal debts are basically nonexistent. If you, as a minor, had money hungry parents that demanded you lend them money, you could never really force them to pay it back as far as practicality is concerned. The national debt (and the budget deficit) are just political issues based on the misguided notion that the government has to balance a checkbook like a family does. We can spend all we want with no economic impact. The problem arises not because it it a bad idea in itself, but because, thanks to that political posturing I just mentioned, people tend to perceive it as a bad idea. Our economy doesn't run on reality, it runs on perception of reality and knee-jerk reactions. A beautiful example of this is when a company falls short of projected profits but still makes profits and even makes more than in previous years. The more emotional investors usually turn "more profit than ever but less than anticipated" into "LOSS! Oh, dear God, help me! We're all gonna die! Arrgg!!!" and put the company in trouble. The same reason could (not definite, but possible) make oil prices drop if projects to begin drilling began, even if the supply was years away. Knee-jerk idiocy and ignorance run most of Wall Street and goes on to greatly affect the economy as a whole.

I never knew all that. Though, everything you just said could be biased from your self-admitted party affiliations, but it does make sense. I would just think that we would be better off without such a large deficit, but then again I'm no political expert by far.

Then let us bask in each other's brilliance!

lol I now officially like you Asterisk.

[TheAsterisk!]

I never knew all that. Though, everything you just said could be biased from your self-admitted party affiliations, but it does make sense. I would just think that we would be better off without such a large deficit, but then again I'm no political expert by far.

No, I'm more of a Libertarian without the isolationist part of the deal. I used to be strictly anti-drug, but I've found that position is hard to defend reasonably. I agree with the Republicans' economics and squirm thinking about both parties' foreign policies. The current Democrat economic platform strikes me as quasi-Communist and their politics seem paternalistic, so I tend to despise them a little more consistently. I'm a bizarre mix of positions, but not a Republican. McCain just seems like the less odious of two turds at present; that may or may not change.

lol I now officially like you Asterisk.

Shall I reciprocate the sentiment?
...
I believe I shall, though I can't honestly include the LOL bit. I'm sporting more a grin than anything else.

[Fionn Mac]

Many Americans are still unwilling to jump on board with the "Change" aspect of Obama and are hesitant to back someone without "experience". If the economy hadn't gone in the direction it has and everything else had remained the same, I could see Obama not having as much competition as he is receiving from McCain. But seeing as where we are now, many older Americans (Mainly Republicans but increasingly some Hillary supporters) want to see a sense of stability return to the White House and they feel the experienced or battle tested McCain can accomplish that better, far better than some young upstart especially one who's as idealistic as Obama.
In any case the race and age prevalence taking place will definitely keep this race close until the end.

As far as the Pig with lipstick comment it was a rather poor choice of old rarely used political jargon and put simply it was a very bad joke. But before the McCain camp and its supporters see it as Obama being sexist or a "dirty player," it would do them justice to remember what their "Straight Talker" said last year.

One could imply it was in reference to Hillary in the same way people are trying to connect it to being about Palin.