McCain takes 5 point lead over Obama--a 12 point swing from last month

[b1e9a8r5s]

TJ, it's not that it shouldn't matter as evidence of McCain's service to his country.

It's that it doesn't matter in terms of whether it means he will be a good president or not. But you wouldn't know that from listening to him, because that's all he talks about. He connects EVERYTHING back to that.

DB, let me just say that in my limited time here, I've thought you to be fair (even for being a lefty) so I will try to be fair as well.

You say he comes back to that all the time. You know why he does, because it's a good point for him! Of course he brings that up, because not even Obama would dare question his patriotism on it. So, therefore it's a winning issue (although not an issue really). Just like Obama goes back to either "change" or I was against the war since the beginning. Or McCain on the surge. You play to your strengths. Now I do agree that his POW status/story shouldn't be anyone's sole reason for voting for him, but neither should Obama's I'm a black guy (obviously Obama doesn't bring this up much, but the fact is there are people voting for him for that reason).

Here's what bugs me....

You (left/dems/liberals) always refer to any conservative commentators or even posters on here as either just reciting the talking points or fear mongering. I've heard it over and over again. At the same time, almost all pro-Obama posts that are talking about McCain refer to him being Bush or a continuation of Bush. If that’s not the #1 talking point of the Obama campaign, I don't know what is. If you want to support Obama, god bless you that's your right. Tell me what you like about him, tell me what policies he has that you are excited about and we can have a back and forth. We'll probably agree to disagree but hey, it's all good. I'm so sick of hearing about Bush. The fact is that Bush could have cured cancer in 2007 and it wouldn't have mattered to you all. He's the anti-Christ, we get it. Worst ever, yada yada yada. The fact that Bush is (in your opinion) the worst ever, doesn't mean **** for either Obama or McCain. The fact is, 4 years ago, McCain was what Joe Liberman is to the republicans now. A pretty cool guy on the other side of the aisle who likes to stick it to his on party from time to time. Has he changed from that in his run for office, sure he has. But let's not act like Obama's positions have been set in stone either.

I'm starting to ramble, so I'll wrap it up. Tell me why you like Obama and/or don't like McCain with out mentioning George Bush. We can have a back and forth about it, I'm sure.

[DenButsu]

Well, let me start with a purely selfish reason, so I can reach across the aisle and relate to you guys over there. (And I hope I don't actually have to color that sentence green).

I have diabetes. And due to diabetes complications, I've had about 6 major eye surgeries over the past 5 years or so, and countless laser surgeries on top of that. (By major I mean that both of the lenses in my eyes have been replaced with artificial ones, I've had retinal peels done on both the eyes, which is a procedure to remove the uppermost skin-like layer off the retina to reduce the risk of retinal detachment and the subsequent blindess that would result, in my left eye - which has glaucoma - I've had a "window" (basically a hole with a flap over it) created so that the liquid inside the eye can drain out to relieve the eye pressure). On top of all this are just the regular visits to both my diabetes doctors and eye doctors that I need to constantly make, and the fairly large quantities of diabetes and eye medicine I have to buy. Now, fortunately, I live in Japan, where it's required by law that everybody have health insurance. You can either choose your own or that which your company provides to you (both of which are expensive options, either for you or for them), or you can get the Japanese national health insurance. Probably the luckiest thing in my life - second only to the fact that I have a great, loving wife who has supported me through all this **** - is that EVERYBODY can get the national insurance.

I'll never forget the first time I went to the local ward office here (at that time I, like most foreigners, did not have health insurance - something that's illegal technically, but not really enforced) and said, "Hi, I need to ask about health insurance." I took a number, got called and went up to the counter and said, "Yeah, I'm wondering if it would be possible for me to get insurance?" The woman was shocked to find out I didn't have any, and immediately proceeded to ask me to show her my gaijin (foreigner) residence card so she could hook me up.

I said, "Wait, I don't think you understand. I have diabetes."

Her: "So?"

Me: "...and all these eye problems and stuff, too."

Her: "So? You have to have insurance. It's illegal not to. Does your company give you insurance? (No.) Are you going to get private insurance (No.) Well, then we have to set you up with the national insurance plan."

And that was it. I walked out of there... INSURED. It was almost magical to me.

When I'd lived in the U.S. I had gone through all this crap so many times due to having a "pre-existing condition" (diabetes). One example: The state of Colorado has what's called "CUHIP" (sounds like q-hip), the Colorado Uninsurable Health Insurance Program. What you have to do is apply for health insurance at a private company, and then get rejected. And then do that again. And then do that again. And THEN, with three rejection letters in hand, you can go to the state and get their - fairly crappy but better than nothing - health insurance. It's totally ****ing crazy. And when I tell my friends or students about that here, they're like, "Eeeeeeeeeeee?!?" (which is Japanese for, "Dude, that is so totally ****ing crazy!").



So, selfish reason number one for wanting Obama over McCain:

Obama's health care plan accounts for people with "pre-existing conditions" - people with diabetes, cancer, heart disease, lung disease, HIV/AIDS, the list goes on and on and on. And the list consists of exactly that segment of society - adults and children - who most urgently need health insurance.

Obama's plan accounts for us.

McCain's leaves us in the exact same place we are now: S.O.L.


That's all I have time to write for now.

[blenderboy5]

Polls are not stupid, they are useful tools. They are a good indication of where the race stands. This poll is just one poll though, so I wouldn't read all that much into it, but when taken in accordance with all the other polls I think it is clear that McCain is closing the gap.

I talked about all the polls that came out here...
http://www.prosportsdaily.com/forums...=250774&page=2
post 24

Nah polls are stupid. Basically most people don't understand poll questions. So they go with whatever answer sounds nicer. For instance, if someone said "Do you support John McCain's tax cuts which some believe promote eating poor black people," I'll say I do support it. Because I know John McCain doesn't advocate the injestion of people. However, there are millions in this country who will say "Wow, I didn't know McCain supported eating black people... I'm completely against his tax plan now." And it's not just against McCain or for Obama. That's just how people take polls on any subject. They pretend they understand the topic, go with whatever most people seem to support (that's why they'll agree to "Do you support Barack Obama's plan for universal health care which has received praise from some republicans" but disagree with "Do you support Barack Obama's plan for universal health care which has been compared to socialism in America." The plans not changing just the wording), and try to seem not insane.

Of course. I mean, how else could Republicans actually compete? Mudslinging is how they compete, because everything else about their whole campaign, policies, and ideas won't win them the election.

Yeah, Obama the chosen one never slings mud. In fact, neither does anyone on the left.

But just to clarify, why does the DNC have to hire PR people to talk to candidates about religion? Or lie to voters and pretend they care about fiscal responsibility? Or downplay their views on abortion, the supreme court, gay marriage, etc?

[blenderboy5]

Ugh. That must be awful DB. But then again, the idea of any kind of surgery where I can't close my eyes and be knocked unconscious scares the **** out of me.

But that being said, I'm not really a fan of taxpayer money helping people who I feel deserve to be SOL. You want to smoke cigarettes every day for 30 years? Be my guest. But when you get lung cancer, tough ****. I'm not gonna cry if you can't afford to go to the doctor and I sure as hell don't feel like helping to foot the bill. Same goes for lard-*** who eats his way into a heart attack, bypass surgery, or other diseases. I hope that dollar menu tasted good going down, but I shouldn't have to pay for your chubby stupid lifestyle. If you drink your way out of a liver I'm not enthusiastic about paying for surgery.

To answer the original question, this happened because of Georgia v Russia, ads like the Paris Hilton ad, and oddly enough the economy. But Georgia v Russia helped a lot. Voters heard Obama say that he would run to the Security Council for change we can believe in when they realized "What the **** is he talking about, Russia's a permanent member on the SC..."

[Jay22Redd]

Obama '08- Choose Hillary as VP

[Eastside Scott]

Hmmmmm...... so a man with almost identical views who voted like Bush 95% of the time in Amendment and law voting is not a Bush clone? Please care to explain!

Sigh...I will try to explain one more time, but frankly your comments make my point for me.

My point is that as an Obama supporter, you are not advocating FOR him but rather AGAINST McCain. Many Obama supporters when pressed can come up with no other reason to elect Obama other than saying "he is not Bush, or Bush's clone McCain". All I am looking for is good reasons for Obama to be President. I do not view "he is not some other guy" as a reliable reason for being President. I am also not Bush or McCain, and while I feel I would make a good benevolent dictator, I do not feel I would be a great President.

The english muffin I ate for breakfast this morning is not McCain or Bush. Per your main argument, had I not eaten it, it would have been well qualified to be President of the United States. I feel like my breakfast could very well have changed the course of history.

[Tragic Johnson]

TJ, it's not that it shouldn't matter as evidence of McCain's service to his country.

It's that it doesn't matter in terms of whether it means he will be a good president or not. But you wouldn't know that from listening to him, because that's all he talks about. He connects EVERYTHING back to that.

I totally agree with you 100%. As great as it is for a person to put their lives on the line for their country, it doesn't mean the country owes them the highest office in the land. It was true for Bob Dole, kerry, and now McCain.

However, my whole point was about the SUDDENLY found fascination Democrats had in 2004 with someone's service, or equally important, lack of service, in Vietnam and how it SHOULD be a factor in voting for a President. And now, I further intrigued by how they are back to their normal selves, believing it SHOULDN'T be a factor (just like they had in 2002 and 2006). Have you forgotten already? You guys were falling all over yourselves about how John Kerry was a decorated hero and how George Bush had his daddy bail him out through the National guard. All of a sudden, not going to Vietnam was viewed as a sin by you guys. That's the point I was trying to make.

And by the way, Kerry was way worst at constantly connecting himself to Vietnam. At least McCain is consistent with it, while Karry has reshaped what his stint Vietnam meant according the current political climate and how it will help him politically at that particular moment.

[PHX-SOXFAN]

Typical liberal thinking: it's everyone else's fault but your own.

How about actually standing FOR something instead of just being AGAINST everthing Bush has done. How about talking on your speeches about specifics of what you will do isntead of implying to all of us that you are the chosen Messiah? It would also be nice if you mixed in a reference or two from your past political career where you actually accomplished something meaningful as an elected official (and sorry, but "I opposed this war since the beginning" doesn't count).

I love the regurgitated Rush talking points that have been addressed over and over but are still being touted as fact by the blowhards and spin machine clones. He gives specifics in his speeches, listen to more than the soundbites Rush plays. His site also has all of his policy stances and ideas. His site and many others also have legislative accomplishments. I can provide them if you need, just stop spouting lies and talking points that aren't true.

[SmthBluCitrus]

Ya know ... We haven't raelly seen a whole lot about what McCain is for, or why McCain is a better candidate than Obama except possibly for the fact that he's a Vietnam Vet, but I still don't think that's a reasonable qualification to be President.

The only thing we "liberals" have seen from the other side is that all Obama talks about is change but not what type, that his middle name is Hussein, and something about communist Cuba.

Where is the backing of McCain? Why is McCain so great? Or is it just easier to attack the Democrat?

[Bosox Believer]

The english muffin I ate for breakfast this morning is not McCain or Bush. Per your main argument, had I not eaten it, it would have been well qualified to be President of the United States. I feel like my breakfast could very well have changed the course of history.

While I understand you are employing irony to try and prove a point, I will address it literally so as to prove my own.

The first question you have to ask yourself is: Do you believe that this country would be best served to have George Bush's administration continue for the next four years?

Question two is: Do you believe that McCain's potential administration will most closely resemble Bush's administration, or will Obama's potential administration most closely resemble Bush's administration?

Question three is: From which party is "English Muffin" receiving the nomination from? Which states will allow "English Muffin" to appear on the ballot for President of the United States?

Now, if you answer yes to question one, congratulations! Your choice for President will be an easy one come November 4. If you answer no to question one, please move on to question 2.

If you believe McCain is most similar to Bush, but you can't bring yourself to vote for someone who you cannot trust for whatever reason, than you must be quite disappointed with this years Presidential race (unless, of course you love Bush). I'm sorry. If you believe that Obama will most closely resemble the Bush administration, then, once again I am sorry, because you have no grip on reality.
You see, elections are quite often a referendum on current administrations. You might not like it, but it is reality. If you have a problem with people voting for "not Bush", than you might want to contact the McCain campaign and tell them to stop giving man hugs to GW. You also might want to suggest they do not vote with the current administration 95% of the time.
Now, for question 3.

As silly as it seems for me to address the potential campaign of your breakfast snack, it raises one important point. Obama is "qualified" to run for President by virtue of his being over the age of 35, and born a citizen of the United States of America. Additionally, he is about to receive the Democratic Party's nomination for President. Millions and millions of people have placed their faith in this man to lead us out of the failed policies of the current administration. I gather you don't agree with these millions of people that he is qualified, but I assure you that in my mind, as well as a great many others he is. I think it is illogical, and disrespectful, to compare the Democratic Party's candidate to a delicious, yet trivial bakery product.

The truth of the matter is, neither one of the people running for President this year has ever held this most unique, and powerful position before. Neither one has THE experience of a President, as there is no job like it in the world. I think Obama has the right experience and qualities of a person that would make a good President. I cannot say the same for McCain. I am on record here and now saying, "I do not think John McCain is a good person." And I do not want someone who I believe to be a bad person running my country.

Thank you.

[Eastside Scott]

While I understand you are employing irony to try and prove a point, I will address it literally so as to prove my own.

The first question you have to ask yourself is: Do you believe that this country would be best served to have George Bush's administration continue for the next four years?

Question two is: Do you believe that McCain's potential administration will most closely resemble Bush's administration, or will Obama's potential administration most closely resemble Bush's administration?

Question three is: From which party is "English Muffin" receiving the nomination from? Which states will allow "English Muffin" to appear on the ballot for President of the United States?

Now, if you answer yes to question one, congratulations! Your choice for President will be an easy one come November 4. If you answer no to question one, please move on to question 2.

If you believe McCain is most similar to Bush, but you can't bring yourself to vote for someone who you cannot trust for whatever reason, than you must be quite disappointed with this years Presidential race (unless, of course you love Bush). I'm sorry. If you believe that Obama will most closely resemble the Bush administration, then, once again I am sorry, because you have no grip on reality.
You see, elections are quite often a referendum on current administrations. You might not like it, but it is reality. If you have a problem with people voting for "not Bush", than you might want to contact the McCain campaign and tell them to stop giving man hugs to GW. You also might want to suggest they do not vote with the current administration 95% of the time.
Now, for question 3.

As silly as it seems for me to address the potential campaign of your breakfast snack, it raises one important point. Obama is "qualified" to run for President by virtue of his being over the age of 35, and born a citizen of the United States of America. Additionally, he is about to receive the Democratic Party's nomination for President. Millions and millions of people have placed their faith in this man to lead us out of the failed policies of the current administration. I gather you don't agree with these millions of people that he is qualified, but I assure you that in my mind, as well as a great many others he is. I think it is illogical, and disrespectful, to compare the Democratic Party's candidate to a delicious, yet trivial bakery product.

The truth of the matter is, neither one of the people running for President this year has ever held this most unique, and powerful position before. Neither one has THE experience of a President, as there is no job like it in the world. I think Obama has the right experience and qualities of a person that would make a good President. I cannot say the same for McCain. I am on record here and now saying, "I do not think John McCain is a good person." And I do not want someone who I believe to be a bad person running my country.

Thank you.

I bolded the only place in your post where you gave qualifications for Obama to be President other than "He is not Bush". So yes, you have disqualified my breakfast, but you did not disqualify me. I would represent change. If I had won the nomination, would you just blindly support me?

I am not trying to just stir things up here, but you tried to rebut me in a 1000 word essay that still (by your own admission) just boiled down to "Yes, you are right, I am supporting Obama because he is not George Bush".

[yaowowrocket11]

Sigh...I will try to explain one more time, but frankly your comments make my point for me.

My point is that as an Obama supporter, you are not advocating FOR him but rather AGAINST McCain. Many Obama supporters when pressed can come up with no other reason to elect Obama other than saying "he is not Bush, or Bush's clone McCain". All I am looking for is good reasons for Obama to be President. I do not view "he is not some other guy" as a reliable reason for being President. I am also not Bush or McCain, and while I feel I would make a good benevolent dictator, I do not feel I would be a great President.

The english muffin I ate for breakfast this morning is not McCain or Bush. Per your main argument, had I not eaten it, it would have been well qualified to be President of the United States. I feel like my breakfast could very well have changed the course of history.

Now I understand. I will give you reasons why I am voting for Obama:

Education: Will give money to Department of Education to make sure all schools are currently updated with the best technology to that the students, this country's future, are fully equipped for their education. He will also reform the No Child Left Behind act, by improving standardizing testing, and to improve the schools that need it. Education is especially important to me, seeing that I am starting my teaching career on Monday.

Obama will also create jobs, especially where needed, in the science fields. Investing in science will help the US economically, since we will be able to compete with the overseas countries for topics such as alternative fuel, or better car manufacturing.

Obama will be helping immigrants, who have no had the opportunity to work, by giving them the job skills they need to be a productive member of society, make a living for their family, and assimilate into their community.

He will be giving tax rebates to workers who need it. Tax cuts for working families.

My personal favorite thing that Obama will do:

Create jobs BY IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT

Wants to advance the study and improvement of biofuels. Making jobs in the "clean technologies" field, to improve the environment.

Obama will create over 5 million new "green" jobs for Americans.

And this is only a part of why I am voting for Obama.

[Eastside Scott]

Now I understand. I will give you reasons why I am voting for Obama:

Education: Will give money to Department of Education to make sure all schools are currently updated with the best technology to that the students, this country's future, are fully equipped for their education. He will also reform the No Child Left Behind act, by improving standardizing testing, and to improve the schools that need it. Education is especially important to me, seeing that I am starting my teaching career on Monday.

Obama will also create jobs, especially where needed, in the science fields. Investing in science will help the US economically, since we will be able to compete with the overseas countries for topics such as alternative fuel, or better car manufacturing.

Obama will be helping immigrants, who have no had the opportunity to work, by giving them the job skills they need to be a productive member of society, make a living for their family, and assimilate into their community.

He will be giving tax rebates to workers who need it. Tax cuts for working families.

My personal favorite thing that Obama will do:

Create jobs BY IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT

Wants to advance the study and improvement of biofuels. Making jobs in the "clean technologies" field, to improve the environment.

Obama will create over 5 million new "green" jobs for Americans.

And this is only a part of why I am voting for Obama.

This is great. This is what I have been looking for. Honestly, this is the start point for a decent discussion. You ar the first person in the entire forum to break away from the "who he isn't" into the "who he is". I truly applaud you.

Now, if I may continue the discussion...

Could you please tell me who exactly is paying for all of this great stuff?

[blenderboy5]

We'd actually prefer if you didn't ask that question. Because a logical answer could be "We'll end the war your stupid lying imperialist president started."

But then it gets awkward because Barack Obama isn't going to end the Iraq war before at least 2010. At least. In fact I'd say not until 2012 when Democrats run on the "Ignore our platform they ****ed up Iraq" idea again.

[yaowowrocket11]

This is great. This is what I have been looking for. Honestly, this is the start point for a decent discussion. You ar the first person in the entire forum to break away from the "who he isn't" into the "who he is". I truly applaud you.

Now, if I may continue the discussion...

Could you please tell me who exactly is paying for all of this great stuff?

Bush tax cuts for the wealthy over the past years has cost this nation over 2 trillion dollars. Bush increased the nation's debt by over 50%. By reversing the wealthy tax cuts, and stop the pointless government spending on student loan's, for example, our nation's situation would be better.