2008 Presidential Candidates Comparison ( Side By side)... DOn't know what to think.

[peacelover18]

Quote:

Originally Posted by *Stargazer* Joe Biden's remarks weren't a big news story when HE was a presidential candidate, long before Sarah Palin was a blip on the radar. Howard Dean isn't the former Chairman of the DNC. As for the media thinking Edwards' affair was below their standards. This is the same media that didn't seem to have an issue insinuating that John McCain had an affair with Vicki Iseman. Interesting how one is below standards (despite proving to be true) and one isn't. As for the Iraq coverage going by the wayside because of election coverage, I might buy it if the surge hadn't taken place MONTHS ago before this upswing in political news.

I don't think you read what I actually wrote about John Edwards affair. I said that it was most likely that the media simply couldn't verify the story.

I don't think the rest your argument really holds up to scrutiny, but I'm not going to argue anymore and this is going to be my last post in this thread.

My point is simply that it is irrational to believe that the entire media is an elitist, liberal platform for the Democratic party. I implore all of you to not throw around the term "biased media" so easily.

Thank you all for your thoughtful replies.

 

[red]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beauty Mark Do you think Obama conceding a little to McCain's points was good or bad? I thought it was a good idea (made him look like he didn't think McCain was the devil)

politics is better than Hollywood

all scripted my friend .. all scripted ...

at the end of the day, the voters in Florida will decide who'll be the next president ...

 

[MAC_Whore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kimmy i just have to say that watching the debate made me think both candidates need a lesson in manners. did they really need to interrupt and talk over each other so much? gosh.

One thing that annoyed me was that Obama was calling McCain "John" a lot of the time, whereas McCain was referring to Obama as "Senator Obama" or "Senator". I think that Obama could have returned the courtesy of addressing McCain with the same level of respect. That said, I didn't see all of the debate, so perhaps it was a reciprocal thing, it just didn't happen when I was watching.

BTW, did anyone notice Jim Lehrer trying to goad them into an arguement? Like when they said something abrasive or accusatory, he would say, "Tell it to him" or "Say it to Senator __________". lol I'll bet if he had boxing gloves, he would have handed them out.

 

[rbella]

OMG!! I totally noticed that, but I didn't want to say anything b/c I thought it was just me. It was so obvious and so silly. If they don't want to look at one another, let it go old man.

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAC_Whore One thing that annoyed me was that Obama was calling McCain "John" a lot of the time, whereas McCain was referring to Obama as "Senator Obama" or "Senator". I think that Obama could have returned the courtesy of addressing McCain with the same level of respect. That said, I didn't see all of the debate, so perhaps it was a reciprocal thing, it just didn't happen when I was watching.

yeah, i noticed that as well. the whole thing, to me, made obama seem a little too immature to be president. i didn't see much of mccain raising his voice, but there were a few times when obama got really loud and i didn't really think that was necessary.

 

[M.A.C. head.]

Why is everyone jumping to the conclusion that Obama was trying to disrespect McCain by calling him by his first name? Maybe he was just being more personable since he was in the midst of discourse with him. And it IS a big deal that McCain wouldn't LOOK at Obama WHILE DEBATING him. It's a debate, not a speech. Since we're labeling people and making judgments about their ability to lead based of of their attitudes, maybe McCain isn't ready to deal with allies OR enemies, because he couldn't even look his opponent in the face. Sounds stupid doesn't it? People are trying to call Obama immature for saying "whatever" but McCain's actions were no better. Shaking heads and smirking from both sides, yes; but was it necessary for McCain to try to stoop to such a level as to repeat "What Senator Obama doesn't understand is" over and over again?

The war is not our only problem, and just because McCain served in the military or was a POW doesn't mean that he is any more ready to lead than Obama.

 

[purrtykitty]

I'm pretty sure it's a disrespectful move any way you look at it. He did the same thing to Hilary. The way I was taught to speak to anyone remotely older than me, it was Mr. or Ms. *insert last name here* until said person gave me permission otherwise by saying, "You can call me *insert first name here*."

And most of the time, both candidates were taking notes while the other one was speaking so that they could address specific points upon rebuttal. I cannot write legibly while looking elsewhere, and I imagine neither of them can do so, either.

 

[missworld]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkylarV217 To make things clear, i didn't write the Original Post, I received it in an e-mail and posted it to get others opinions on the election and the candidates .

I tend to junk my spam.


Quote:

Originally Posted by SkylarV217 And to me its a big deal that one of the candidates didn't serve in the military since one of the main jobs of the president is to become Commander and Chief of the United States Army.

Thomas Jefferson wouldn't have got your vote then...

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkylarV217 To me it's better to have a leader that has been experienced in that area,b/c it shows they are willing to sacrifice for the country they want to run, but that is simply my opinion I am fully aware that some of the greatest American presidents did not serve in the military.

If you are aware that some of this country's greatest presidents did not serve in the military, what in your opinion made them so great?
Perhaps things other than militarism?

I believe Barack Obama has the makings of a great President, not for how well he speaks but for what he says and does.

Isn't the President supposed to act in military matters with and on the advice of the heads of the armed forces?
How much more or less likely is that president to act on that councel if he himself was once a One Star General? When considering this you may want to bear in mind all US One Star Generals must retire by the age of 68.

If you are only saying you admire John McCain's service to this country that's great, so do I! But cheer McCain and Vote Obama because we need and the world needs the best man for the job, Give Barack the chance to serve his county as President.

Love and Peace

missworld

 

[M.A.C. head.]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purrtykitty I'm pretty sure it's a disrespectful move any way you look at it. He did the same thing to Hilary. The way I was taught to speak to anyone remotely older than me, it was Mr. or Ms. *insert last name here* until said person gave me permission otherwise by saying, "You can call me *insert first name here*." And most of the time, both candidates were taking notes while the other one was speaking so that they could address specific points upon rebuttal.

What does that have to do with them? They are both grown men.

I'm sure that being president requires the mastery of multitasking.

 

[purrtykitty]

Quote:

Originally Posted by missworld all US One Star Generals must retire by the age of 68.

Just because someone is required to retire upon a certain age does not mean all knowledge he/she possesses is immediately purged from the brain. Personal knowledge of the inner workings of a specific system (such as the military) is much more helpful to one's decision-making process than relying just on the opinions of advisors.

Quote:

Originally Posted by M.A.C. head. What does that have to do with them? They are both grown men.

Yes, and both have achieved a status that respect should be displayed. McCain acknowledged Obama's status as Senator, Obama should've been courteous enough to acknowledge the same.

Quote:

I'm sure that being president requires the mastery of multitasking.

Great...listening while writing is multitasking.

 

[SkylarV217]

Quote:

Originally Posted by missworld I tend to junk my spam. Thomas Jefferson wouldn't have got your vote then...

Jefferson was fighting against Britain in coordinating the first continental congress and the declaration of independence proving that he is willing to sacrifice for our country him and John Adams both ( the two i consider great from the bunch)

And to clarify I would not have voted for either b/c i as a women would not have been able to vote.

For me it is an important issue, maybe because of my military background and my military future. But I would not vote for a candidate just because of his military background , i simply think it is a plus.

 

[missworld]

Quote:

Originally Posted by purrtykitty Just because someone is required to retire upon a certain age does not mean all knowledge he/she possesses is immediately purged from the brain.

Agreed! But, though it is a fact sadly to be lamented, as we age our faculties can be diminished.

Quote:

Originally Posted by purrtykitty Personal knowledge of the inner workings of a specific system (such as the military) is much more helpful to one's decision-making process than relying just on the opinions of advisors.

Or may give the person who possesses this knowledge, depending on her or his personality and mental disposition, the idea she or he already knows the best course of action and is qualified to ignore the advise of advisors, even if those advisors are the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by purrtykitty Yes, and both have achieved a status that respect should be displayed. McCain acknowledged Obama's status as Senator, Obama should've been courteous enough to acknowledge the same.

A difference in style?

I believe constantly addressing someone by her/his title can be rude and cold...


missworld

 

[MAC_Whore]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M.A.C. head. Why is everyone jumping to the conclusion that Obama was trying to disrespect McCain by calling him by his first name? Maybe he was just being more personable since he was in the midst of discourse with him. And it IS a big deal that McCain wouldn't LOOK at Obama WHILE DEBATING him. It's a debate, not a speech. Since we're labeling people and making judgments about their ability to lead based of of their attitudes, maybe McCain isn't ready to deal with allies OR enemies, because he couldn't even look his opponent in the face. Sounds stupid doesn't it? People are trying to call Obama immature for saying "whatever" but McCain's actions were no better. Shaking heads and smirking from both sides, yes; but was it necessary for McCain to try to stoop to such a level as to repeat "What Senator Obama doesn't understand is" over and over again? The war is not our only problem, and just because McCain served in the military or was a POW doesn't mean that he is any more ready to lead than Obama.

Whilst they are both guilty of a lack of direct eye contact, interrupting and making statements that were a bit abrasive, I think those things are different than the name issue, as those were obvious and outwardly apparent. Whereas the use of the first name struck me as an insidious bit of belittling.

Maybe he was being personable, but considering that it was a formal affair (Foreign Policy debates aren't casual chatter), perhaps it wasn't the best time for "John".

I also see it as a matter of professional respect. John McCain is a Sr. Senator with a long political career, whereas Obama is a Jr. Senator with less experience. I think Obama could have afforded McCain the professional courtesy of addressing him in the same manner that McCain addressed him.

 

[valabdalnabi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M.A.C. head. Why is everyone jumping to the conclusion that Obama was trying to disrespect McCain by calling him by his first name? Maybe he was just being more personable since he was in the midst of discourse with him. And it IS a big deal that McCain wouldn't LOOK at Obama WHILE DEBATING him. It's a debate, not a speech. Since we're labeling people and making judgments about their ability to lead based of of their attitudes, maybe McCain isn't ready to deal with allies OR enemies, because he couldn't even look his opponent in the face. Sounds stupid doesn't it? People are trying to call Obama immature for saying "whatever" but McCain's actions were no better. Shaking heads and smirking from both sides, yes; but was it necessary for McCain to try to stoop to such a level as to repeat "What Senator Obama doesn't understand is" over and over again? The war is not our only problem, and just because McCain served in the military or was a POW doesn't mean that he is any more ready to lead than Obama.

I agree. When someone can't even get the courage to look you in the eye, do you really want to trust that person.... McCain looked like he lacked confidence...and even looked like he would lose his temper at times. Obama seemed calm and poised ...characteristics of a true leader. As president you should not be afraid to talk to your enemy. This is called "diplomacy". I am not basing my opinions only on their mannerisms...but its quite interesting to see how they react under pressure. And as president this will be important too.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by valabdalnabi I agree. When someone can't even get the courage to look you in the eye, do you really want to trust that person.... McCain looked like he lacked confidence...and even looked like he would lose his temper at times. Obama seemed calm and poised ...characteristics of a true leader. As president you should not be afraid to talk to your enemy. This is called "diplomacy". I am not basing my opinions only on their mannerisms...but its quite interesting to see how they react under pressure. And as president this will be important too.

Well, we definitely need to focus and home in only on the strengths of one candidate and the weaknesses of the other.
For the love of all that's holy, tell me...what is it you want to change? Do you want to change how our budget is spent? Awesome. Not a presidential responsibility, solely. That's something our representatives within Congress hammer out.
Do you want healthcare universally? Hey! Neat! Not something a president can promise you.
Do you want ANY kind of change?
At all?
If so, focus more on the guys who are dealing with the nut cut on it instead of the guy who's standing at the forefront smiling and waving.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAC_Whore I also see it as a matter of professional respect. John McCain is a Sr. Senator with a long political career, whereas Obama is a Jr. Senator with less experience. I think Obama could have afforded McCain the professional courtesy of addressing him in the same manner that McCain addressed him.

We don't live in an America where the idea of professional courtesy is valued anymore. We live in an America now where children call adults by first name, and don't feel compelled to be mindful of title or position. Honestly, I think the behaviour you mentioned is a direct example.

 

[valabdalnabi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by missworld I tend to junk my spam. Thomas Jefferson wouldn't have got your vote then... If you are aware that some of this country's greatest presidents did not serve in the military, what in your opinion made them so great? Perhaps things other than militarism? I believe Barack Obama has the makings of a great President, not for how well he speaks but for what he says and does. Isn't the President supposed to act in military matters with and on the advice of the heads of the armed forces? How much more or less likely is that president to act on that councel if he himself was once a One Star General? When considering this you may want to bear in mind all US One Star Generals must retire by the age of 68. If you are only saying you admire John McCain's service to this country that's great, so do I! But cheer McCain and Vote Obama because we need and the world needs the best man for the job, Give Barack the chance to serve his county as President. Love and Peace missworld

...if she got it as spam..why would she post it? hmmmnnn...and as you can see the first pages of this thread people actually believed those lies. In reality it was only to be written by a big wig in Wachovia...check out the details on factcheck.org.

I do also agree that McCain made a honorable service to this country too. But to me his experience no way outweighs the value and importance of Obamas JUDGEMENT.

 

[Shimmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by valabdalnabi ...if she got it as spam..why would she post it? hmmmnnn...and as you can see the first pages of the thread people actually believed those lies. In reality it was only to be written by a big wig in Wachovia...check out the details on factcheck.org. I do also agree that McCain made a honorable service to this country too. But to me his experience no way outweighs the value and importance of Obamas JUDGEMENT.

Of course.
Because a person's EXPERIENCE in no way affects their JUDGMENT. I mean, seriously, who would think that a silly think like EXPERIENCE would color a person's PERSPECTIVE, which, of course, has absolutely NO bearing on a person's JUDGMENT.

Silly me.

 

[kimmy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by valabdalnabi Obamas JUDGEMENT.

you mean the judgement he used in staying with a church who's preacher repeatedly proclaimed "goddamn America?" or the judgement he used when he refused to put his hand over his heart for the pledge?

he doesn't seem to be exercising very good judgement, but maybe that's just me.

 

[valabdalnabi]

No , I mean the judgement for:
1. not voting to go to war with Iraq-for supposed weapons of mass destruction that they never found....
2. not telling the american people that the fundamentals of the economy ARE STRONG and the next day the economy falls....etc.etc.....
McCain's EXPERIENCE is stumped by his POOR JUDGMENT. Not just on the war in IRAQ but also on his failure to learn economics during his many years of service while sitting in a body politic that is supposed to care DEEPLY about economics.