Question: Did you feel the same way in '80 with George Bush? He had called Reagan's economic policies, "Vodoo Economics." He had before then been Pro-Choice. Did that invalidate the Reagan ticket for you that year? Would it have if you aren't old enough to have voted then?

 

Historically speaking that smacks of "It's okay if it's a Republican changing face to help the ticket but not a Democrat."

 

Answer

 

In the 80's I was a lefty right up there with the most liberal of them so to answer your question, yes I did feel exactly the same way. I voted against Regan both times, I also voted against Bush I both times.

 

I've grown up and become an adult since then.

Answer

 

In the 80's I was a lefty right up there with the most liberal of them so to answer your question, yes I did feel exactly the same way. I voted against Regan both times, I also voted against Bush I both times.

 

I've grown up and become an adult since then.

 

So I ask another question: does that in anyway effect your views of Reagan's Administration looking backward now? Does it disqualify them or the job they did in conjuction with George Bush?

 

The point I'm trying to make is that such differences rarely, if ever, have impact on the performance of a presidential administration. Therefore it's not a very good measuring stick for determining a solid administration or a weak one.

From an ANTI-OBAMA Democrat my feelings on the debate were:

 

1. Gwen, the moderator was awful never let her do anything like this again.

2. Both candidates made mishaps throughout the debate, so I'm not going to go there.

3. Biden got his teeth whitened.

4. Palin got some new highlights.

5. Characterized, say it slowly next time Biden.

6. Palin was real nervous coming out, she was breathing heaving and you could see her chest raise and her throat swell with every swallow during the first 10 minutes.

7. Biden, continued to smile, at who and why?

8. MEMO to BOTH VP candidates. Quit slinging out Obama.McCain voted for this bill, whaddya whaddya whaddya, no one cares because they voted for the majority of these issues under much different circumstances than we are facing currently and we just want to know what they will vote for in the future, not the past because they have ALL voted to contradict themselves more than once.

9. I give the edge to Palin because I like her straigh forward approach, I feel like she is a real person and would serve our country and not corrupt it like so many others have., JMO. I get that down to earth feeling from her.

10. Both would be down right scary to have as Prez, but not near as bad as BHO being Prez.

 

:thumb: Agree totally.

I watched a bit of the debate again and read through the transcript, and I remain utterly and hopelessly unimpressed with Palin. There was hardly a difference between her debate performance and the Couric interview. What was the difference, everyone thought she did well? Instead of muddling through answers and pretending like she had any relevant knowledge as she did with Couric, when Palin was faced with a question she didn't know or could speak intelligently about (and there were embarrassingly plenty) she immediately answered a question that wasn't asked, but one she had an answer for. Exceeds expectations? Yes. Has the knowledge or understanding I expect of someone on a national ticket? No. In other words, her debate performance affirms her vacuous interviews with Gibson and Couric - she's clueless.

 

I agree.

 

It really is amazing how many people see things so vastly different. I can't fathom how people truly believe that she preformed well.

I agree.

 

It really is amazing how many people see things so vastly different. I can't fathom how people truly believe that she preformed well.

I can't fathom how you or Habib could think otherwise. I also can't fathom how you think Obama would be a good choice for POTUS.

I watched a bit of the debate again and read through the transcript, and I remain utterly and hopelessly unimpressed with Palin. There was hardly a difference between her debate performance and the Couric interview. What was the difference, everyone thought she did well? Instead of muddling through answers and pretending like she had any relevant knowledge as she did with Couric, when Palin was faced with a question she didn't know or could speak intelligently about (and there were embarrassingly plenty) she immediately answered a question that wasn't asked, but one she had an answer for. Exceeds expectations? Yes. Has the knowledge or understanding I expect of someone on a national ticket? No. In other words, her debate performance affirms her vacuous interviews with Gibson and Couric - she's clueless.

 

Your bolded comment...When Biden found himself in the same situation, he chose to lie. The fact finders and media are trying to decide whether he knowingly lied 19 or 22 times during the debate.

 

If someone lies 19 times during a debate, would you consider them clueless, or more simply, a liar?

 

Biden has turned completely around about how he feels about obama since getting picked. When he espouses anything now that is any different than when he was attacking obama a few months ago, I also take that as lying and being wishy-washy.

 

I sort of like Biden. He's just been too involved with the left for so many years, I just don't think he's what we need in our Vice right now. Palin's ability to connect with many blue collar workers and families will be more beneficial in Washington IMO.

Your bolded comment...When Biden found himself in the same situation, he chose to lie. The fact finders and media are trying to decide whether he knowingly lied 19 or 22 times during the debate.

 

If someone lies 19 times during a debate, would you consider them clueless, or more simply, a liar?

 

You might have a point if my post was about Biden or I had said Biden didn't engage in rhetoric or untruthful statements. But, let's look at the factual innaccuracies.

 

Palin mistakenly claimed that troop levels in Iraq had returned to “pre-surge” levels. Levels are gradually coming down but current plans would have levels higher than pre-surge numbers through early next year, at least.

 

Palin repeated a false claim that Obama once voted in favor of higher taxes on “families” making as little as $42,000 a year. He did not. The budget bill in question called for an increase only on singles making that amount, but a family of four would not have been affected unless they made at least $90,000 a year.

 

Biden wrongly claimed that McCain “voted the exact same way” as Obama on the budget bill that contained an increase on singles making as little as $42,000 a year. McCain voted against it. Biden was referring to an amendment that didn't address taxes at that income level.

 

Palin claimed McCain’s health care plan would be “budget neutral,” costing the government nothing. Independent budget experts estimate McCain's plan would cost tens of billions each year, though details are too fuzzy to allow for exact estimates.

 

Biden wrongly claimed that McCain had said "he wouldn't even sit down" with the government of Spain. Actually, McCain didn't reject a meeting, but simply refused to commit himself one way or the other during an interview.

 

Palin wrongly claimed that “millions of small businesses” would see tax increases under Obama’s tax proposals. At most, several hundred thousand business owners would see increases.

 

Palin said, "We're circulating about $700 billion a year into foreign countries" for imported oil, repeating an outdated figure often used by McCain. At oil prices current as of Sept. 30, imports are running at a rate of about $493 billion per year.

 

Biden claimed that McCain said in a magazine article that he wanted to deregulate the health care industry as the banking industry had been. That’s taking McCain’s words out of context. As we’ve said before, he was talking specifically about his proposal to allow the sale of health insurance across state lines.

 

Biden said five times that McCain's tax plan would give oil companies a "$4 billion tax cut." As we’ve noted previously, McCain’s plan would cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 25 percent — for ALL corporations, not just oil companies. Biden uses a Democratic think tank's estimate for what the rate change is worth to the five largest U.S. oil companies.

 

Palin threw out an old canard when she criticized Obama for voting for the 2005 energy bill and said, “that’s what gave those oil companies those big tax breaks.” It’s a false attack Sen. Hillary Clinton used against Obama in the primary, and McCain himself has hurled. It’s true that the bill gave some tax breaks to oil companies, but it also took away others. And according to the Congressional Research Service, the bill created a slight net increase in taxes for the oil industry.

 

Biden said that Iraq had an "$80 billion surplus." The country was once projected to have as much as a $79 billion surplus, but no more. The Iraqis have $29 billion in the bank, and could have $47 billion to $59 billion by the end of the year, as we noted when Obama used the incorrect figure. A $21 billion supplemental spending bill, passed by the Iraqi legislature in August, knocked down the old projection.

 

Biden said four times that McCain had voted 20 times against funding alternative energy. However, in analyzing the Obama campaign's list of votes after the first presidential debate, we found the number was actually 11. In the other instances the Obama-Biden campaign cites, McCain voted not against alternative energy but against mandatory use of alternative energy, or he voted in favor of allowing exemptions from these mandates.

 

Factcheck.org

 

Do you have a link to your 19-22 statement?

I can't fathom how you or Habib could think otherwise. I also can't fathom how you think Obama would be a good choice for POTUS.

 

I understand, thus my comment "It really is amazing how many people see things so vastly different." That was not meant as a dig, but as a point of observation. Someone mentioned it earlier in this thread, about how people could watch the exact same debate and come away with conflicting opinions.

So I ask another question: does that in anyway effect your views of Reagan's Administration looking backward now? Does it disqualify them or the job they did in conjuction with George Bush?

 

The point I'm trying to make is that such differences rarely, if ever, have impact on the performance of a presidential administration. Therefore it's not a very good measuring stick for determining a solid administration or a weak one.

 

It has nothing to do with my decision not to vote for Obama and I'll agree with you that it has little to do with a presidential administration, however this thread is about the VP candidates. There are some in this thread that have looked for any little minutiae they could find to run down Palin, I'm doing the same.

 

I maintain that Biden is a liar and nothing has been done to change my mind. He has sold out his convictions in order to latch onto Obama and now says that he agrees with everything about him. That also makes hin a spineless sellout in my book.

 

FWIW Obama could have named anyone his running mate and it wouldn't have swayed my decision about voting for him one bit. That decision was made before he was even nominated.

Coming from someone with a Palin Avatar. :lol:

 

And yet, I won't be voting for her ticket....

And yet, I won't be voting for her ticket....

 

Who's ticket then McCain?

Who's ticket then McCain?

 

Go read the "Who are you Voting for" thread....

:sleep:

 

The poll would indicate that the majority agrees that she won the debate.

 

What else would you expect on this site? Seriously...the BGP Political forum is pretty conservative.

^That's because there's a lot of intelligent people on BGP....

I thought Palin did about as good as the McCain campaign could have hoped--that is, she didn't have a brainlock moment and she recited the talking points she was given. She did come off, to me, as totally over the top fake 'folksy'. On one hand, I'm glad there isn't going to be another VP debate. If I have to hear her utter another forced "Gosh darnit", "dog gone it", "Joe Six Pack", or hear her make another empty "maverick" assertion, I think I'd be sick. Her performance gave the impression of rifling through her pre-rehearsed answers, many of which were strangely inappropriate for the question. What was up with that one question where she was asked about the mortgage crisis and hit play on her canned answer about energy? What the heck was that about? Didn't she have a canned answer about the mortgage crisis she could recite?

 

It says a lot about McCain's confidence in Palin that she apparently will not be having any more interviews and will not be made available to answer any questions from the press before the election.