The old politics is alive and well - "they'd better take steps to innoculate him".

[b1e9a8r5s]

It's been noted in the media that McCain has shifted positions on 31 different occasions:



Source: startribune.com

You may automatically dismiss anything from MSNBC but if his reversals happened, they happened. This isn't editorializing. He has flip-flopped because he is now being managed by the party he used to be critical of. Talk about hypocritical. What does he stand for anymore? Isn't the once independent-minded media darling just doing whatever he needs to in order to win votes?

I didn't ask you anything about McCain. I was asking if you really believe that Obama is a "new politician", and if so, how does his changes on positions fit with that. I wasn't trying to bait you into anything, just trying to understand if you or any of the other Obama supporters believe the "new politician" claim. If your for him because he's the "lessor of two evils" in your opinion, then that's fine, but just say that.

[ink]

I didn't ask you anything about McCain. I was asking if you really believe that Obama is a "new politician", and if so, how does his changes on positions fit with that. If your for him because he's the "lessor of two evils" in your opinion, then that's fine.

My point is that we're naive if we think political leaders don't change their positions on things. The irony about McCain is that he has had a Republican makeover on many of the issues he once stood for. I don't think we're seeing anything nearly so extreme in Obama. And when I've referred to "old politics" I'm talking about the character assassination and negative campaigning the Republicans resort to. If McCain wants to talk issues, he should talk issues. He doesn't need the rest. But what his campaign organizers want to do is shake people's confidence in Obama as a person. They are not debating issues, they are attacking a person. That is "old politics" and I don't know of any other party that does it as "well" as the Republicans.

[b1e9a8r5s]

My point is that we're naive if we think political leaders don't change their positions on things. The irony about McCain is that he has had a Republican makeover on many of the issues he once stood for. I don't think we're seeing anything nearly so extreme in Obama.

So, you don't think he's a different kind of politician. That's all I was asking. What are your main reasons for supporting him then? What are the big issues for you? Or is it you don't like McCain, or Republicans?

[ink]

So, you don't think he's a different kind of politician. That's all I was asking. What are your main reasons for supporting him then? What are the big issues for you? Or is it you don't like McCain, or Republicans?

I think his intelligence and humanity are genuine. He's a well grounded individual, and I find it ludicrous that his opponent is attempting to undercut his strongest traits. Yes, there is something different about him. I don't regard him as a "new politician" as much as I think of him as a "new American politician". I strongly think that America needs to stop being so inward and isolationist. That's by far the biggest issue for me. I think the question is - does America always want to elect the party that will shelter it and play on its worst insecurities? I find the Republican party to be the parochial party and I'm hoping that America sees what that has done in the world over the last eight years. I'm hoping Obama is just the first of many American presidents who will be more sophisticated and outward looking.

[DenButsu]

I'm hoping Obama is just the first of many American presidents who will be more sophisticated and outward looking.

And the mistake that people are making - the illusion that McCain is somewhat effectively peddling right now - is that "educated" and "sophisticated" and "not a total shmuck' means he's an "elitist".

While McCain has many, many millions of dollars more than Obama in his bank account...

[ari1013]

I just want to ask something here; since it’s obvious the majority of you are for Obama. In regards to the "new kind of politics" that he's proposing or advocating, how do you reconcile that to his "shifts" in positions? Telling the people in Pennsylvania and Michigan that he's anti NAFTA and then after securing the nomination saying that NAFTA is a good thing. Or speaking to a Pro-Israel lobby and speaking of an undivided Jerusalem and then the next day backing off that. Or the shifts on FISA and the possibility of more drilling (both of which I agree with btw). I just want to hear how that fits in with his "new brand of politics".

My opinion is that deep down, despite what he says, he's still "just a politician", allthough a very skilled one, I must admit.

It's nothing new. Every politician bows to the base during the primaries and then takes a run to the center once they get the nomination.

As far as the "new politician" mantra:
1. He's not taking any money from lobbyists, so that's a plus because he's not going to be beholden to their interests once elected.

2. He's running a relatively clean campaign. The worst thing that anyone seems to be able to come up with is that a Hillary surrogate, Wes Clark, said McCain's military service does not constitute executive experience.

3. He's running for the people's interests. Listen to his speeches, read his platforms. Most of it is about how you can better yourself. How you can get yourself on the right track.

[b1e9a8r5s]

It's nothing new. Every politician bows to the base during the primaries and then takes a run to the center once they get the nomination.

As far as the "new politician" mantra:
1. He's not taking any money from lobbyists, so that's a plus because he's not going to be beholden to their interests once elected.

2. He's running a relatively clean campaign. The worst thing that anyone seems to be able to come up with is that a Hillary surrogate, Wes Clark, said McCain's military service does not constitute executive experience.

3. He's running for the people's interests. Listen to his speeches, read his platforms. Most of it is about how you can better yourself. How you can get yourself on the right track.

Are you implying that McCain is not running for people's interests? What is he running for then? Also, and I apologize for not having a link, but I read that while Obama hasn't taken money from lobbyists he has many donations from the spouses of lobbyists. A loophole around it, if you will. I wish I could remember where I saw the article.

[b1e9a8r5s]

Here's an article about Obama's money....

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/444/

So it depends on your defenition of "lobbyists".

[ari1013]

Are you implying that McCain is not running for people's interests? What is he running for then? Also, and I apologize for not having a link, but I read that while Obama hasn't taken money from lobbyists he has many donations from the spouses of lobbyists. A loophole around it, if you will. I wish I could remember where I saw the article.

McCain's definitely running for certain interests, but it's not for the Average Joe's well being.

As for your article

Is it possible that Barack Obama took "a dime" from someone connected to oil and gas lobbyists? Yes. But it looks as if Obama took good-faith measures not to accept money from current lobbyists for any industry, including oil and gas. For these reasons, we find his statement Mostly True.

That's about as good as it gets. He's clearly taking steps to avoid agenda-filled-donations. That's new politics.

[b1e9a8r5s]

McCain's definitely running for certain interests, but it's not for the Average Joe's well being.

As for your article

That's about as good as it gets. He's clearly taking steps to avoid agenda-filled-donations. That's new politics.

I love how it's thrown out there like it's gospel that McCain or any other Republican doesn't care about the people. I just don't even know how to respond to that.

That's as good as it gets? I would call that diverting everyones attention by claiming one thing and then doing something else behind the curtain.