Explain to me why Obama and Biden both ...

[Shastafarian]

Affirmative.

My apologies. What question did I answer?

[Cant_Be_Faded]

It is a big glaring contradiction. Kinda how they've been saying McCain is a typical bush-esque republican on foreign issues, then they turn around and say he's not like the republicans on social issues to try to alienate right-leaning voters. Theyre trying to do both but should really just choose one path and run with it.

[MannyIsGod]

It is a big glaring contradiction. Kinda how they've been saying McCain is a typical bush-esque republican, then they turn around and say he's not like the republicans on social issues to try to alienate right-leaning voters. Theyre trying to do both but should really just choose one path and run with it.

Thats not how politics works. One thing you also need to remember is that certain statements are made under certain context. If Biden is speaking in front of teachers, he may say one thing but if he's speaking to a group of vets he may take a different angle that seemingly contradicts the first statment because of the seperate context.

In politics context can be everything and it can be meaningless but its usually important.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Thats not how politics works. One thing you also need to remember is that certain statements are made under certain context. If Biden is speaking in front of teachers, he may say one thing but if he's speaking to a group of vets he may take a different angle that seemingly contradicts the first statment because of the seperate context.

In politics context can be everything and it can be meaningless but its usually important.

I meant in the same situation though. I think it was a social issue, but tonight Biden was like "And he's NOT like other republicans, he isn't!"
something to that effect.

Its kind of the same deal as LJ brought up, to someone hearing how McCain is like other republicans over and over and over again.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't see what the alternative is -- act like the negotiations are not taking place? Completely change the policy because Bush has to go along with it.

[timvp]

It is a big glaring contradiction. Kinda how they've been saying McCain is a typical bush-esque republican on foreign issues, then they turn around and say he's not like the republicans on social issues to try to alienate right-leaning voters. Theyre trying to do both but should really just choose one path and run with it.

Exactly.

Obama/Biden got this ish in the bag. Doublespeak is useful if the race is close and the issue is up for grabs. Neither is true in this situation. With this talking point, Obama/Biden is biting off more than they have to chew.

Putting conditions on painting Bush as the Antichrist makes no sense.

[timvp]

I don't see what the alternative is

Barack Obama offered a clear plan. Shift responsibility to Iraqis over the next 16 months. Draw down our combat troops. Ironically the same plan that Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq, is seeking with the United States. The only odd man out here, only one left out is John McCain

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I'm starting to believe the real point of this thread was for timvp to prove he has a more masculine middle name than biden.

[CuckingFunt]

I'm starting to believe the real point of this thread was for timvp to prove he has a more masculine middle name than biden.

I think you may have a point.

[timvp]

I'm starting to believe the real point of this thread was for timvp to prove he has a more masculine middle name than biden.

Robinette is a bad ass middle name. It's like if Palin was a superhero and she needed a sidekick.

[Mr. Peabody]

It is a big glaring contradiction. Kinda how they've been saying McCain is a typical bush-esque republican on foreign issues, then they turn around and say he's not like the republicans on social issues to try to alienate right-leaning voters. Theyre trying to do both but should really just choose one path and run with it.

I don't know that it's a contradiction. A pervasive theme for the Democrats in this campaign is that McCain would be a war hawk president. That's why we keep hearing about McCain's alleged refusal to utilize diplomacy during foreign affairs. The Iraq illustration is being used to show that McCain is such a war hawk that he is in favor of continuing a war that even the most committed proponents (i.e., the Bush Administration) would now like to see end.

I think it's somewhat misleading though because McCain has already acknowledged that he would like to draw down the number of troops when the conditions call for it and has recently said that the 16-month time-line is not necessarily a bad idea.

[ChumpDumper]

Barack Obama offered a clear plan. Shift responsibility to Iraqis over the next 16 months. Draw down our combat troops. Ironically the same plan that Maliki, the prime minister of Iraq, is seeking with the United States. The only odd man out here, only one left out is John McCain

So pretend negotiations are not taking place and pass up the chance to declare scoreboard.

Eh, if anyone follows events in Iraq, they already know this. Just seems like another Iraq issue they can claim to have gotten right all along. I don't see how saying Bush has been forced to see the light as well is going to cost them any votes.

[timvp]

So pretend negotiations are not taking place

What part of that revised quote pretends negotiations aren't taking place.

and pass up the chance to declare scoreboard.

There's a difference between declaring scoreboard and using the other team's most hated player as an ally.

[ChumpDumper]

What part of that revised quote pretends negotiations aren't taking place.

Where does it say they are taking place?

There's a difference between declaring scoreboard and using the other team's most hated player as an ally.

Not an ally, a reluctant follower.

Just how many votes do you think this is costing Obama?

[Buddy Holly]

[Mr. Peabody]

Where I thought that Obama and Biden might be making a mistake was when they were first to side with Bush on the bailout deal. You have a very unpopular President pushing an extremely unpopular piece of legislation a month before the election. The bad part was that Obama/Biden appeared to be in lockstep with Bush before McCain was. It had the potential for disaster on their part.

[timvp]

Where does it say they are taking place?

Where does it say it in the original quote?

Not an ally, a reluctant follower.

A follower is an ally. Reluctance doesn't doesn't factor in.

Just how many votes do you think this is costing Obama?

How many votes is the current strategy gaining for Obama?

[ChumpDumper]

Where does it say it in the original quote?

I thought Obama actually said that the other night. Forgive me if I remembered incorrectly. It's not that important to me.

A follower is an ally. Reluctance doesn't doesn't factor in.

A follower is a follower.

How many votes is the current strategy gaining for Obama?

I have no idea. I didn't start the thread. The implication of your starting this thread is that this is hurting Obama. How much?

If I inferred that incorrectly and you don't think it's hurting Obama, tell me why you started the thread.

[timvp]

Where I thought that Obama and Biden might be making a mistake was when they were first to side with Bush on the bailout deal. You have a very unpopular President pushing an extremely unpopular piece of legislation a month before the election. The bad part was that Obama/Biden appeared to be in lockstep with Bush before McCain was. It had the potential for disaster on their part.

But, but, but Obama/Biden is showing that even the Antichrist is for something that the deregulation monger is against.


/"we"

[TheMadHatter]

What's the point of this thread?

Just another closet Republican who's too afraid to say he's Republican making hay of a complete non-issue.

[timvp]

I didn't answer your question about where it was in the original quote.

Didn't think you would because you can't.

A follower is a follower.

So an ally isn't a follower and a follower isn't an ally? Might want to alert Webster.

I have no idea.

If you can't tell me how many votes this is gaining him then I can't compare it to how many votes it may cost. Give me a baseline number and I'll work off that.

Thanks.

[timvp]

What's the point of this thread?

Just another closet Republican who's too afraid to say he's Republican making hay of a complete non-issue.

Answering your own question with a wrong answer is quite a talent.

[ChumpDumper]

Didn't think you would because you can't.

Right. I don't remember how Obama said it. I thought he did. I certainly could be wrong because I don't care about this as much as you.

So an ally isn't a follower and a follower isn't an ally? Might want to alert Webster.

It's a matter of emphasis for as much as I care, which is not that much.

If you can't tell me how many votes this is gaining him then I can't compare it to how many votes it may cost. Give me a baseline number and I'll work off that.

Thanks.

No need. You started the thread. Let's hear it. You obviously have this figured out. You don't need any help from me.

Thanks.

[TheMadHatter]

Typical post from a conservative too ashamed to admit he's conservative. Take a completely trivial point and try and make hay of it.

[Nbadan]

How can you destroy Bush with every ounce of your soul out of one side of your mouth and then out of the other side of your mouth use McCain thinking differently than Bush as evidence that McCain is wrong? I know politics is all about doublespeak but this talking point is just mind-boggling.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.....but it doesn't excuse the fact that Bush got us into this quagmire in the first place....