I have always believed that this explained the Kentucky DINO phenomenon. Many local elections have no GOP presence, so lots of folks register as Democrats just so they can participate.

I actually register Democrat when I turned 18 because that is what my family all was. I really didn't know one from the other. I have never changed it because of the reason you state here. If you are registered anything but you won't get much say in a lot of the local stuff.

I have no doubt that Palin is competent enough to be Governor of Alaska and the mayor of Wasilla. It's just a big jump between leader of an iceberg and the leader of the world. She's in over her head and anyone who doesn't see that or doesn't want to admit it has their head in the sand.

 

That would be a great argument...if Sarah Palin was running for president. I understand that might be an easy mistake to make with all the attention she has received, but last time I checked, John McCain was still the Republican Nominee.

Good point. That probably explains the lot of it.

 

That would explain 90% or more, IMO.

 

I changed my registration when I worked for the DOT so I could get off half a day for local elections...

I'd like to thank you all for some nice posts and keeping the discussion civil.

 

So, after sifting through the responses, let me re-visit my original questions and report what I have learned.

 

1. What makes Obama more credible and qualified than Palin?

 

Answer: He's a better, more polished speaker who seems to have a better grasp of the issues.

 

2. What has Obama done as a senator that is more impressive than Palin's work as governor?

 

Answer: Nothing.

 

3. Why should I believe that Obama would be more bipartisan than McCain as president?

 

Answer: No reason to think that.

 

 

This thread can be closed now for all I care.

1. What makes Obama more credible and qualified than Palin?

 

Answer: He's a better, more polished speaker who seems to have a better grasp of the issues.

 

I think they are both good speakers. Both can deliver a stemwinder in front of a teleprompter, though Obama is a bit better at it. But, Palin couldn't have less of a grasp of the issues. I blushed when I heard her answers to the few questions she's been asked. It's insulting.

 

2. What has Obama done as a senator that is more impressive than Palin's work as governor?

 

Answer: Nothing.

 

I agree. Both are young.

 

3. Why should I believe that Obama would be more bipartisan than McCain as president?

 

Answer: No reason to think that.

 

I don't think there is any question. McCain has a strong record of bipartisanship. I was convinced McCain would win this election based on that. Obama is a liberal and he doesn't have the experience that most, apparently, value. Despite the tarnished Republican brand, McCain had distinct appeal to moderates and even Democrats weary of Obama. Over the course of the summer, however, the party establishment and eager Bushian campaigners injected themselves into McCain's campaign. He's since abandoned quite a bit of his sensible, pragmatic approach in favor of what a couple of hacks have instructed will result in victory, no matter the consequence. I've been a supporter of John McCain since I began following politics, and I still am, but after his putting Palin on the ticket I don't believe I can vote for him in good conscious.

I'd like to thank you all for some nice posts and keeping the discussion civil.

 

So, after sifting through the responses, let me re-visit my original questions and report what I have learned.

 

1. What makes Obama more credible and qualified than Palin?

 

Answer: He's a better, more polished speaker who seems to have a better grasp of the issues.

 

2. What has Obama done as a senator that is more impressive than Palin's work as governor?

 

Answer: Nothing.

 

3. Why should I believe that Obama would be more bipartisan than McCain as president?

 

Answer: No reason to think that.

 

 

This thread can be closed now for all I care.

 

You can choose to believe whatever you want as answers to your questions. So can the rest of us.

That would be a great argument...if Sarah Palin was running for president. I understand that might be an easy mistake to make with all the attention she has received, but last time I checked, John McCain was still the Republican Nominee.

 

Just based on history, we have had 8 of 43 presidents die in office. That's about a 1:5 likelihood that ANY president will die in office. I think it makes Palin's ability to be president extremely relevant.

Personally, I'm more nervous about Pelosi being 3rd in line than Palin potentially being 2nd in line.

Personally, I'm more nervous about Pelosi being 3rd in line than Palin potentially being 2nd in line.

 

Statistically speaking, this is hardly a possibility.

Just based on history, we have had 8 of 43 presidents die in office. That's about a 1:5 likelihood that ANY president will die in office. I think it makes Palin's ability to be president extremely relevant.

How many have died of natural causes in the last 50 years?

You can choose to believe whatever you want as answers to your questions. So can the rest of us.

 

That's why I started the thread and posed the questions. The answers I posted were pulled directly from the thread.

 

The strongest response for why Obama is more credible and qualified basically boiled down to him being a better speaker and having a better grasp of the issues.

 

I never got an answer to questions 2 and 3, presumably because there was nothing to say. I'd much rather you answer the questions and tell me why I should believe otherwise, rather than a third grade response like the one you gave.

 

So, I'll ask you directly...

 

1. What has Obama done as a senator that is more impressive than what Palin has done as governor of Alaska?

 

2. What evidence is there that should lead me to conclude that Obama would be a more bipartisan president, more willing to work across party lines to get things done, than John McCain?

 

Answer the questions. If you can't, don't respond.

^4 and 1/2 hours later and we're still waiting....

^4 and 1/2 hours later and we're still waiting....

 

 

I don't think TB&G has been on line this evening.

^4 and 1/2 hours later and we're still waiting....

 

I don't think TB&G has been on line this evening.

 

TB&G is one of the most reasonable posters here, I'm sure an intelligent response will be provided, so I wouldn't be so quick to "gloat" UKMF. Besides, I'm online and it appears no one has responded to my posts, still waiting...

TB&G is one of the most reasonable posters here, I'm sure an intelligent response will be provided, so I wouldn't be so quick to "gloat" UKMF. Besides, I'm online and it appears no one has responded to my posts, still waiting...

 

My post wasn't directed directly at TB&G. 5wide posed those 2 questions in the very first post, and he re-asked the questions, and still no one has answered...