:thumb:People who are having trouble deciding between McCain and Obama are paying too much attention to words and too little attention to deeds. There is a wide gulf between the voting records of these two candidates and there are not many voters whose own political philosophy is not much closer to one candidate or the other. There should be very, very few undecided voters at this point in the campaign.

 

This is not taking into consideration moderates or those that lean one way on one issue and another way on others. It also does not take into consideration those that mull over which of the two has the best chance of working to actually bring the changes that are needed. Honestly, there are a lot of reasons why people may not have made up their minds.

This is not taking into consideration moderates or those that lean one way on one issue and another way on others. It also does not take into consideration those that mull over which of the two has the best chance of working to actually bring the changes that are needed. Honestly, there are a lot of reasons why people may not have made up their minds.

 

But my initial point which Aces supported, is what is going to cause you to make up your mind? What they say on the campaign stump? I believe, based on your posts in the past, that you are an intelligent person. Thus I'd think that you are smart enough not to put much if any stock in what candidates say on the campaign trail, but rather their past voting records are a much, much better indicator of their thoughts and likely actions. Granted, changing circumstances may cause past positions to change (ie McCain changing his position on off shore drilling and hopefully soon his position on ANWR). But absent some compelling changes, I think past voting record is a much more accurate way to determine whom to vote for; and their past voting record is not going to change.

 

I have no problem with liberals; honestly I don't. I don't agree with them, but that's okay. We just look at life differently. We both want the same things for our country and citizens and that's for all of us to be safe, prosperous and secure. We just disagree on how we get there. I think the liberals also have an easy decision because Obama's past voting record is very liberal.

 

As to the moderates, I think if moderates carefully examine the past voting records of both candidates, their choice is an easy one. Moderates also should have an easy choice as McCain's past voting record is indicative of a moderate much more often than Obama.

 

Ironically its the conservatives that have the tough decision. Obama isn't anywhere close to being conservative. McCain is on some issues, but on other issues is far too moderate, some conservatives would even say liberal (until compared to Obama) on other issues. Conservatives are stuck in the quandry of 1. voting for the R moderate and risking the watering down of conservative principles, or 2.not voting at all (there is no way they'd vote for Obama) and hoping that Obama messes the country up so badly that in 4 years a far right conservative candidate can be elected President. I don't think option 2 is the smart action, certainly not now in our country's history, but I know that it is being considered by some of my more conservative friends.

 

I understand your position that some people want to see which person will have the best chance of working to bring change or straighten things out. Again, I think past performance is the best indicator of a person's ability to do just that in the future, not what they say on the stump they are going to do in the future. Perhaps its just me, but I think I've read on here many more Democrats saying they agree with McCain's positions on certain matters than I've read Republicans saying they agree with any of Obama's positions. Now the cynic will say that's just because the R's are close minded people, whereas the D's are open minded. I don't believe that to be true. I think that its simply because McCain is more of a centrist on some issues whereas Obama is no where close to being a centrist on any issue. Please don't insult me and point out what Obama is saying now. I was born at night, but it wasn't last night. Hillary exposed Obama's weakness and he's trying to strengthen it; nothing more, nothing less. He's a smooth and dynamic talker. Great. I know plenty of shyster attorneys that are smooth and dynmamic speakers. Its not the words that will bring us out of our mess, its actions and to the extent past performance is indicative of future performance (and I again think that's the case), I still submit that for most people it should be an easy choice.

Edited July 14, 200818 yr by leatherneck

But my initial point which Aces supported, is what is going to cause you to make up your mind? What they say on the campaign stump? I believe, based on your posts in the past, that you are an intelligent person. Thus I'd think that you are smart enough not to put much if any stock in what candidates say on the campaign trail, but rather their past voting records are a much, much better indicator of their thoughts and likely actions. Granted, changing circumstances may cause past positions to change (ie McCain changing his position on off shore drilling and hopefully soon his position on ANWR). But absent some compelling changes, I think past voting record is a much more accurate way to determine whom to vote for; and their past voting record is not going to change.

 

I have no problem with liberals; honestly I don't. I don't agree with them, but that's okay. We just look at life differently. We both want the same things for our country and citizens and that's for all of us to be safe, prosperous and secure. We just disagree on how we get there. I think the liberals also have an easy decision because Obama's past voting record is very liberal.

 

As to the moderates, I think if moderates carefully examine the past voting records of both candidates, their choice is an easy one. Moderates also should have an easy choice as McCain's past voting record is indicative of a moderate much more often than Obama.

 

Ironically its the conservatives that have the tough decision. Obama isn't anywhere close to being conservative. McCain is on some issues, but on other issues is far too moderate, some conservatives would even say liberal (until compared to Obama) on other issues. Conservatives are stuck in the quandry of 1. voting for the R moderate and risking the watering down of conservative principles, or 2.not voting at all (there is no way they'd vote for Obama) and hoping that Obama messes the country up so badly that in 4 years a far right conservative candidate can be elected President. I don't think option 2 is the smart action, certainly not now in our country's history, but I know that it is being considered by some of my more conservative friends.

 

I understand your position that some people want to see which person will have the best chance of working to bring change or straighten things out. Again, I think past performance is the best indicator of a person's ability to do just that in the future, not what they say on the stump they are going to do in the future. Perhaps its just me, but I think I've read on here many more Democrats saying they agree with McCain's positions on certain matters than I've read Republicans saying they agree with any of Obama's positions. Now the cynic will say that's just because the R's are close minded people, whereas the D's are open minded. I don't believe that to be true. I think that its simply because McCain is more of a centrist on some issues whereas Obama is no where close to being a centrist on any issue. Please don't insult me and point out what Obama is saying now. I was born at night, but it wasn't last night. Hillary exposed Obama's weakness and he's trying to strengthen it; nothing more, nothing less. He's a smooth and dynamic talker. Great. I know plenty of shyster attorneys that are smooth and dynmamic speakers. Its not the words that will bring us out of our mess, its actions and to the extent past performance is indicative of future performance (and I again think that's the case), I still submit that for most people it should be an easy choice.

 

 

Ironcially I've felt something similar in the past 8 years. I was very disappointed in the actions of Clinton in his personal life. My feelings were to give the Cons a chance and see what they could do. I even felt some of that in '04. Well, it's been 8 years and I my impressions are that this place is a much bigger mess than it had to be because of current White House leadership. If I do the same for Obama and see if he creates a bigger mess it might leave us all wondering who is out there that can lead us out of our current problems.

But my initial point which Aces supported, is what is going to cause you to make up your mind? What they say on the campaign stump? I believe, based on your posts in the past, that you are an intelligent person. Thus I'd think that you are smart enough not to put much if any stock in what candidates say on the campaign trail, but rather their past voting records are a much, much better indicator of their thoughts and likely actions. Granted, changing circumstances may cause past positions to change (ie McCain changing his position on off shore drilling and hopefully soon his position on ANWR). But absent some compelling changes, I think past voting record is a much more accurate way to determine whom to vote for; and their past voting record is not going to change.

 

I have no problem with liberals; honestly I don't. I don't agree with them, but that's okay. We just look at life differently. We both want the same things for our country and citizens and that's for all of us to be safe, prosperous and secure. We just disagree on how we get there. I think the liberals also have an easy decision because Obama's past voting record is very liberal.

 

As to the moderates, I think if moderates carefully examine the past voting records of both candidates, their choice is an easy one. Moderates also should have an easy choice as McCain's past voting record is indicative of a moderate much more often than Obama.

 

Ironically its the conservatives that have the tough decision. Obama isn't anywhere close to being conservative. McCain is on some issues, but on other issues is far too moderate, some conservatives would even say liberal (until compared to Obama) on other issues. Conservatives are stuck in the quandry of 1. voting for the R moderate and risking the watering down of conservative principles, or 2.not voting at all (there is no way they'd vote for Obama) and hoping that Obama messes the country up so badly that in 4 years a far right conservative candidate can be elected President. I don't think option 2 is the smart action, certainly not now in our country's history, but I know that it is being considered by some of my more conservative friends.

 

I understand your position that some people want to see which person will have the best chance of working to bring change or straighten things out. Again, I think past performance is the best indicator of a person's ability to do just that in the future, not what they say on the stump they are going to do in the future. Perhaps its just me, but I think I've read on here many more Democrats saying they agree with McCain's positions on certain matters than I've read Republicans saying they agree with any of Obama's positions. Now the cynic will say that's just because the R's are close minded people, whereas the D's are open minded. I don't believe that to be true. I think that its simply because McCain is more of a centrist on some issues whereas Obama is no where close to being a centrist on any issue. Please don't insult me and point out what Obama is saying now. I was born at night, but it wasn't last night. Hillary exposed Obama's weakness and he's trying to strengthen it; nothing more, nothing less. He's a smooth and dynamic talker. Great. I know plenty of shyster attorneys that are smooth and dynmamic speakers. Its not the words that will bring us out of our mess, its actions and to the extent past performance is indicative of future performance (and I again think that's the case), I still submit that for most people it should be an easy choice.

 

You bring up good points, as usual, LN. I was just talking with a very conservative friend the other day about what I think McCain needs to do to beat Obama. IMO, he needs to (bear with me) forget about the far right. They aren't going to vote for Obama (as someone said, I think Math, even if Jesus Himself endorsed him ). They will be so, for lack of a better word, scared of Obama winning that there is no way they wouldn't vote and little chance that they vote for a third party candidate. I really don't see compassionate, patriotic conservatives making a protest vote with the "well, to heck with these four years, the country deserves what it gets" mentality and NOT voting for the McCain. There are a few that want Obama to win just so they can have four years of wailing about how right they were and how awful our country now is and how 'don't you wish we had GWB back now'...and will do so, even if an Obama presidency shows promise.

 

Anyway, I think that McCain really needs to focus on the moderates and independents. These are the votes that can change. By backing extreme right positions pre-election, he is going to turn off those voters. I know it's pandering, but if he wants to win, he must play strategically. A good example - I feel pretty good about his energy policy. However, if he switches gears and moves more "right" on the issue (opening up ANWR and putting the "drilling" ahead of strongly promoting alternative fuels) then it will be a turn off for me. Again, that is ONE example and not necessarily the selling point for me.

 

I know that doesn't make our hardcore conservatives happy. They may feel alienated, as my friend told me he would. BUT...who do you really want to WIN?

 

There is also a group of democrats that he needs to reach out to. Another friend of mine, a 50 some year old female, is EXTREMELY put out with him. This woman has never voted republican in all her years, but MAY vote for McCain in the fall. Why? "He took away the best chance of seeing a woman president in my lifetime. He's young. Why couldn't he have waited? He should have given Hillary her chance." I know that this is not the best reason to vote for someone, but like it or not, there it is. My friend is debating between voting McCain or just not voting for the first time in her life.

 

The thing is...you have to WIN the election before any of your talking points can go into play.

I thought his mother was white and his father black. Would that not make him as much white as he is black?

 

In sociology they call it the one drop rule. Just one drop of "black blood" and your considered an African American.

Why not: "European-American"...?

 

 

 

An African American can't be a European-American. Africa isn't in Europe.

An African American can't be a European-American. Africa isn't in Europe.

 

I believe he was pointing out the European descent of his mother.

And I call myself hispanic, though that doesn't mean that I forget that I am half-white.

 

I would bet you call yourself hispanic because thats what category your personal experiences put you in. I have had many bi-racial people tell me that. It only makes sense when you understand that race is man made, and is not the same as culture.

I believe he was pointing out the European descent of his mother.

That was my take of his post as well.

I would bet you call yourself hispanic because thats what category your personal experiences put you in. I have had many bi-racial people tell me that. It only makes sense when you understand that race is man made, and is not the same as culture.

 

True. :thumb:

That was my take of his post as well.

 

Me too.

"When that happens, it will change everything. ... You'll have to measure time by `Before Obama' and `After Obama,'" Lee said during the panel. "It's an exciting time to be alive now."

 

The presidency of the first African-American will ripple throughout arts, sports and more, said Lee, whose films include "Malcolm X" and "Do the Right Thing."

 

"Everything's going to be affected by this seismic change in the universe," he said.

 

"I'm for Mr. Obama," Lee said. "I think he's gonna win. And it's going to be a better day not only for the United States but for the world."

Just a wee bit over the top.

 

 

This is the only thing I will agree with Lee on.

 

Asked if there was any validity to the criticism of Obama, Lee replied: "No. Here's the thing: I don't know why people are questioning whether Barack Obama is black enough. For me, that's an ignorant statement."

 

"There are middle-class, educated black people who speak the way he does. ... We have to try to move away from this so-called image of what black is, which is largely influenced by rap and that type of stuff," Lee said.

 

Link

My problem is that Spike Lee is a moron. He wants things both ways. He is quoted in total support of the candidate for what seems to be his race alone. Then he advises we "move away from this so-called image of what black is" and says that it's influenced by rap and that type of stuff, much of which he has been apart of and responsible for.

 

Can I send Reggie Miller over to give him the choke sign like the good ole' days.