• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF Interim Thread of Tears/Lapel Pins (ScratchingHisCheek-Gate)

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

maynerd

Banned
syllogism said:
Hahahah no way he said that
Click to expand...

mccain2_header_03.jpg


He's OLD.
 
S

Steve Youngblood

Member
ZeroTolerance said:
Same thing I asked myself. I guess that is based on the official results. I know GAF has known this for a while now but still worth mentioning.
Click to expand...
That's what I'm assuming. And it's now official: caucuses are a sham. I mean, there was Hillary on the verge of the comeback of the century, winning the make-or-break primary in Texas by a colossal 3 point margin that might as well have been a mandate from the heavens, and she loses the overall delegate count because of a 'caucus'? Who even understands what those things are. Frankly, before we go to the convention, I think we need to explore how legitimate those things are. Last time I checked, Obama isn't going to have any caucuses to win when he faces McCain, who like Hillary has crossed the Commander-in-Chief threshold, in the general election.
 
S

Suikoguy

I whinny my fervor lowly, for his length is not as great as those of the Hylian war stallions
electricpirate said:
Was it general or did he specifically suggest drilling ANWR?
Click to expand...

From what I remember, even doing that would take more then 5 years
 
H

harSon

Banned
Steve Youngblood said:
That's what I'm assuming. And it's now official: caucuses are a sham. I mean, there was Hillary on the verge of the comeback of the century, winning the make-or-break primary in Texas by a colossal 3 point margin that might as well have been a mandate from the heavens, and she loses the overall delegate count because of a 'caucus'? Who even understands what those things are. Frankly, before we go to the convention, I think we need to explore how legitimate those things are. Last time I checked, Obama isn't going to have any caucuses to win when he faces McCain, who like Hillary has crossed the Commander-in-Chief threshold, in the general election.
Click to expand...

bwyf6.jpg
 
M

maximum360

Member
Tom_Cody said:
If he actually said that I'm note voting this fall.
Unless Romney is VP.
Click to expand...

It would be an impressive feat but it's just not at all feasible right now. I'm just interested in how he plans to get this done.

If Hillary or Obama said this the pundits would have a field day with it.
 
M

maynerd

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
It was a bullet point on the TV. I googled it and appearently its been part of his platform for a couple months.
Click to expand...

And this is why the democrat primary is good for McCain. He says some stupid shit and no one notices.
 
F

Frank the Great

Banned
well technically, if iraq, iran, and other middle eastern countries are made into U.S. territories, we wouldn't be importing oil from foreign countries anymore.

maybe that's what mccain means?
 
T

Tamanon

Banned
Francois the Great said:
well technically, if iraq, iran, and other middle eastern countries are made into U.S. territories, we wouldn't be importing oil from foreign countries anymore.

maybe that's what mccain means?
Click to expand...

I actually think that might be it:(

When going to war....."I made a promises to America!"
 
S

Steve Youngblood

Member
maynerd said:
And this is why the democrat primary is good for McCain. He says some stupid shit and no one notices.
Click to expand...
Well, yeah, but let's not focus on that. Let's focus on the fact that, because of all the in-party bickering, every single speck of dirt about Democratic candidates is getting out there right now, and will be completely forgotten before the general election. McCain and the GOP will not be able to say anything even remotely negative because the Democrats will have already addressed every single negative that can be levied against them. It's going to be the smoothest general election season ever if you're a Democrat because the media will only have negative McCain stuff to focus on, unless they want to beat a dead horse, which they would never do.
 
ToyMachine228

ToyMachine228

Member
maynerd said:
And this is why the democrat primary is good for McCain. He says some stupid shit and no one notices.
Click to expand...

Believe me, McCain's lack of competence will be pretty clear when he's put head to head in a debate against Obama who's very articulate and witty.
 
H

human5892

Queen of Denmark
ToyMachine228 said:
Believe me, McCain's lack of competence will be pretty clear when he's put head to head in a debate against Obama who's very articulate and witty.
Click to expand...
"Have I been in a debate before? Jimmy, do me a favor and check if I've debated before. I'm certain that I have, and that my past debating will be consistent with the President's policies."
 
S

siamesedreamer

Banned
Steve Youngblood said:
Well, yeah, but let's not focus on that. Let's focus on the fact that, because of all the in-party bickering, every single speck of dirt about Democratic candidates is getting out there right now, and will be completely forgotten before the general election. McCain and the GOP will not be able to say anything even remotely negative because the Democrats will have already addressed every single negative that can be levied against them. It's going to be the smoothest general election season ever if you're a Democrat because the media will only have negative McCain stuff to focus on, unless they want to beat a dead horse, which they would never do.
Click to expand...

Joke post?
 
C

Cheebs

Member
It's that time of day to see what Hillary fans are blogging about on HillaryIs44:

Big Media will not take notice of serial liar Obama but the people will and do increasingly notice that Obama is a flim flam man and liar. Yesterday we noted the clumsy Obama as flim flam man is trying to charm people who are not taken in by his “pose”. In the birthplace of the Reagan Democrat Obama tried to pretend that he is not the Chicago thug insider that he proves every day to be. Pretending disdain for “designer beers” Obama posed as friend of the working class. Obama’s constituents, whom Obama’s slumlord friend Rezko tormented, could have used a friend to the working class.
Click to expand...
 
D

Dahellisdat

Member
Big Media will not take notice of serial liar Obama but the people will and do increasingly notice that Obama is a flim flam man and liar. Yesterday we noted the clumsy Obama as flim flam man is trying to charm people who are not taken in by his “pose”. In the birthplace of the Reagan Democrat Obama tried to pretend that he is not the Chicago thug insider that he proves every day to be. Pretending disdain for “designer beers” Obama posed as friend of the working class. Obama’s constituents, whom Obama’s slumlord friend Rezko tormented, could have used a friend to the working class.
Click to expand...
wtf.jpg
 
S

Slurpy

*drowns in jizz*
Cheebs said:
It's that time of day to see what Hillary fans are blogging about on HillaryIs44:
Click to expand...

Wasnt the pathetic tool that runs that site exposed to be connected to the Clinton campaign?
Remarkably it was a guy.

Oh, and did a GAF poster actually use the 'passed the commander-in-chief threshold' line in a serious post? Bravo, sir.
 
Z

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
This one's even better.

More evidence of how the “Reagan Democrats” are not fooled by Obama’s schtick and poses came this morning.

While Democrats increasingly worry about winning ugly, Barack Obama was losing beautifully at a bowling lane in this central Pennsylvania city.

---

“My economic plan is better than my bowling,” Obama told fellow bowlers Saturday evening at the Pleasant Valley Recreation Center.

“It has to be,” a man called out. [snip]

Saturday night, it was Obama Bowl-a-Rama.

And it was clear from the start that Obama was way out of his league, certainly any bowling league.


---

Obama bowled a 37. Reagan Democrats know about is out of his league in running for president.
Click to expand...

You heard that right. Apparently, Obama can't become president because he's a terrible bowler.
 
S

Steve Youngblood

Member
Cheebs said:
It's that time of day to see what Hillary fans are blogging about on HillaryIs44:
Click to expand...
You know, in fairness, it's not like they're really that far out of line. It's a bunch of die-hard supporters who get to offer completely one-sided commentary, so it's not like it's all that insane that most of the crap they spew is laughable to people on the outside looking in. Of course HillaryIs44 is a ridiculous circle-jerk -- that's what it was created for.

Even though this site is a lot less sensationalized, even as a die-hard Obama supporter, some of the responses here can be a little ridiculous. I mean, just in the past couple of pages, we have that nymag article talking about why Edwards didn't endorse Obama. Now, to me, here's the sensical response to that:

"Hmm... that might be interesting if it wasn't an article filled with nothing but speculation and hearsay."

Instead, some supporters here would rather spin the article as painting Obama as a man of integrity who won't pander to Edwards poor attempt to inflate his ego by pathetically trying to seem relevant despite his poor performance in this primary season. Like the mighty Obama needs Edwards support -- the guy's a meaningless schmuck anyway.

This entire defense ignores that, if taken at face value, the summary describes Obama as so arrogant that, instead of securing the all-important Edwards endorsement, which should have been a slam-dunk, he would rather stick to his guns and antagonize Edwards and his wife in their own home concerning policy semantics when he was trying to solicit their support.
 
S

Steve Youngblood

Member
Slurpy said:
Wasnt the pathetic tool that runs that site exposed to be connected to the Clinton campaign?
Remarkably it was a guy.

Oh, and did a GAF poster actually use the 'passed the commander-in-chief threshold' line in a serious post? Bravo, sir.
Click to expand...
If you're referring to my post, then apparently my sarcasm just isn't fine-tuned enough. I would have thought that referring to her Texas primary win by three points as a "mandate from the heavens" would have been a dead giveaway, but apparently not.
 
Z

ZealousD

Makes world leading predictions like "The sun will rise tomorrow"
Steve Youngblood said:
This entire defense ignores that, if taken at face value, the summary describes Obama as so arrogant that, instead of securing the all-important Edwards endorsement, which should have been a slam-dunk, he would rather stick to his guns and antagonize Edwards and his wife in their own home concerning policy semantics when he was trying to solicit their support.
Click to expand...

So do you think he should have changed his policy, just to clinch the endorsement? Or maybe it would have been better to just lie?
 
I

Instigator

Banned
Steve Youngblood said:
You know, in fairness, it's not like they're really that far out of line. It's a bunch of die-hard supporters who get to offer completely one-sided commentary, so it's not like it's all that insane that most of the crap they spew is laughable to people on the outside looking in. Of course HillaryIs44 is a ridiculous circle-jerk -- that's what it was created for.

Even though this site is a lot less sensationalized, even as a die-hard Obama supporter, some of the responses here can be a little ridiculous. I mean, just in the past couple of pages, we have that nymag article talking about why Edwards didn't endorse Obama. Now, to me, here's the sensical response to that:

"Hmm... that might be interesting if it wasn't an article filled with nothing but speculation and hearsay."

Instead, some supporters here would rather spin the article as painting Obama as a man of integrity who won't pander to Edwards poor attempt to inflate his ego by pathetically trying to seem relevant despite his poor performance in this primary season. Like the mighty Obama needs Edwards support -- the guy's a meaningless schmuck anyway.

This entire defense ignores that, if taken at face value, the summary describes Obama as so arrogant that, instead of securing the all-important Edwards endorsement, which should have been a slam-dunk, he would rather stick to his guns and antagonize Edwards and his wife in their own home concerning policy semantics when he was trying to solicit their support.
Click to expand...

The main problem is their candidate is losing and has been losing for almost 3 months already. Everything reads like a meltdown after meltdown.

GAF got a taste of this with the Texas/Ohio primaries and the days leading to it where similar bitterness began to surface, mostly during that period. I'd imagine hillaryis44 would be an one-sided but readable blog were Hillary leading by large margins, even if Obama would pull a Huckabee and stay in the race with no shot at winning.
 
S

Steve Youngblood

Member
ZealousD said:
So do you think he should have changed his policy, just to clinch the endorsement? Or maybe it would have been better to just lie?
Click to expand...
Ugh...

Okay, first of all, I think that entire article was a pointless joke, and lend no credibility to it as it's all just speculation on stuff they heard through the grapevine. As an Obama supporter (or even is I was a Hillary supporter), there was nothing of substance anywhere in that article.

But if we're going to acknowledge it by talking about it, it really doesn't make Obama look good. Part of Obama's appeal is that he's a uniter, a good talker, and open-minded on issues. He can reach across party lines and objectively analyze both sides of the story. He will meet with dangerous foreign leaders that most criticize him for, stating that these people can't be reasoned with. Obama is this amazing diplomat and politician who can accomplish what many are cynical of. He's just that good.

Now, this isn't about how he should have waffled to pander for one guy's endorsement. It's about how, apparently, he did such a terrible job chatting with a fellow party member that, not only did he not secure the endorsement, but he antagonized a potentially influential comrade and his wife in their own home in doing so. Seriously, can you not see how this does not go along with his persona and typical demeanor he is known for?
 
E

Evenflow

Member
I'm an Obama supporter so this is probably a totally biased observation, but I've noticed something in this drawn out process, that I believe is do to the fact that Obama is the first truly honest and open politician anyone has see in their lifetime IMO and many don't know how to react. It's easy to see what is in someone's heart by their opinion of Obama. How someone sees the world is how they see him. If someone is hopeful they see hope. If someone is cynical and negative they see doubt and uncertainty. If someone has issues with race, they see race. If someone has hate, they see hate. I think Obama wrote in one of his books that he is like a blank screen that people project themselves onto, and I think that statement couldn't be more true in my observation of how the media, friends, family, and people on the internet view him whether they or for or against him. Myself, I'm and extremely hopeful and optimistic person, almost to a flaw, so I've never seen anything but hope in him. I guess this isn't even a political issue so this is probably off topic, and if you think I'm crazy which this might be don't bother to respond, but I think it's interesting.

edit: I wasn't trying to imply anyone against him is a negative, hateful person. To clarify I meant more how people judge his character and who he is rather than political issues.
 
S

siamesedreamer

Banned
Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters are being completely disengenuous about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty ironic given how upset they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc.

I doubt anyone here has even heard the full McCain quote.
 
Keylime

Keylime

ÏÎ¯Î»Ï á¼Î¾ÎµÏÎγλοÏÏον καί ÏεÏδολÏγον οá½Îº εἰÏÏν
siamesedreamer said:
Obama, <is amazing>, and his supporters are being completely <awesome> about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty <understandable> given how <enraged> they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc. <I just think McCain is really old, and everything he says is probably dusty and smells like moldy furniture.>

I doubt anyone here <is voting for McCain>
Click to expand...
Agree 100%
 
H

harSon

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters are being completely disengenuous about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty ironic given how upset they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc.

I doubt anyone here has even heard the full McCain quote.
Click to expand...

He was making a comparison to Vietnam, Korea, etc.. and how we'll likely have a presence for many years to come no matter the outcome. I personally don't care if it he supports 1 day or 1 million years in Iraq, I simply want out.
 
B

belvedere

Junior Butler
siamesedreamer said:
Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters are being completely disengenuous about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty ironic given how upset they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc.

I doubt anyone here has even heard the full McCain quote.
Click to expand...

That's fine and all, but Mccain doesn't seem to think it's been blown out of context, as he's defended it on more than one occasion.
 
S

syllogism

Member
siamesedreamer said:
Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters are being completely disengenuous about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty ironic given how upset they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc.

I doubt anyone here has even heard the full McCain quote.
Click to expand...
Chuck Todd compared it to Gore's internet/love canal mistake and suggests RNC is afraid it will start a life of its own despite the facts being on their side. I don't think it will, but they are certainly fighting hard to keep it in control.
 
G

gcubed

Member
harSon said:
Did Glenn Beck just compare the increase in oil costs to rising costs in produce and milk?
Click to expand...

??? As in one caused by the other? Because thats not a difficult thing to understand
 
H

harSon

Banned
gcubed said:
??? As in one caused by the other? Because thats not a difficult thing to understand
Click to expand...

He was questioning why people are enraged with the large increase of oil costs and not produce or milk.
 
I

Instigator

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters are being completely disengenuous about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty ironic given how upset they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc.

I doubt anyone here has even heard the full McCain quote.
Click to expand...

I've heard it.

And I don't think permanent bases in Iraq is a good idea.
 
H

harSon

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
no
Click to expand...

Whatever. Japan, Korea, etc.. We will have a presence in Iraq no matter the outcome and he is fine with that as long as American lives are not being lost over it.

Happy?
 
M

maynerd

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters are being completely disengenuous about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty ironic given how upset they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc.

I doubt anyone here has even heard the full McCain quote.
Click to expand...

I have
 
I

Imm0rt4l

Member
human5892 said:
"Have I been in a debate before? Jimmy, do me a favor and check if I've debated before. I'm certain that I have, and that my past debating will be consistent with the President's policies."
Click to expand...

basically.
 
Z

Zaptruder

Banned
siamesedreamer said:
Obama, his surrogates, and his supporters are being completely disengenuous about McCain's "100 years in Iraq" comment. Its pretty ironic given how upset they were about Wright's comments being taken out of context, being tiny snippets, etc.

I doubt anyone here has even heard the full McCain quote.
Click to expand...

So you apologize for Bush only after 8 years and two votes. Will you do the same with McCain?

When are you going to see the writing on the wall man?

Put aside the partisanship. Step out. And have a look again at the candidates from a purely meritable view.

Experience? What's it amounted to for McCain? Senility, judging by a few choice comments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The Most Commonly Spoken Foreign Languages in Each State (Besides Spanish)
2 3
121
15K
Mr. Wedgewood replied
  • Locked
USA Today: Clinton in commanding position for 270 EC votes
2 3 4 5
228
39K
Already Torn replied
  • Locked
Gallup: LGBT Identification Up, Vermont Highest (5.3%), South Dakota Lowest (2.0%)
49
7K
poppabk replied
  • Locked
Is it known as the RMV or DMV in your state?
2
72
9K
Desi replied
  • Locked
Fivethirtyeight: The Rust Belt has been turning red for a while.
2
62
12K
Foffy replied
Top Bottom