Obama up 8 points

[Naked Gents Rut]

No, it isn't. I can see why you'd like to think that, however, as you've shown signs of being an idgit voter in the past.

[Velociryx]

Heh...I'm not losing any sleep over it, Arrian.

Of course, the BEST part about his response was the fact that he'd poured such energy into the argument that the "proper" Obama response to these charges is to keep the attention focused on the current economic crisis.

Interestingly, when I did that (see the mention of the "real issue" (dow below 10k) getting some play too, the counterpunch was to call me an idiot.

Sublime.

-=Vel=-

(I know, I know...what we REALLY need...what will FIX IT and make it ALL BETTER--it's more true if you use all caps, see?-- is four more years of conservatism, cos lookit what it's given us so far! Sorry guy...this isn't a "librul mess" and the solution to the issue of black box accounting that played a big role in getting us here isn't yet more deregulation!)

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Sorry guy...this isn't a "librul mess"

Partly it is.

[Kidlicious]

This is indeed a very bad mess for conservatives. I wouldn't expect another conservative to be elected president for atleast a few decades if one ever gets elected again.

Go ahead and have a good cry, and be done with it guys.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Interestingly, when I did that (see the mention of the "real issue" (dow below 10k) getting some play too, the counterpunch was to call me an idiot.

You're an idgit (not "idiot") because you think Obama is best qualified to fix the economic crisis simply because of the "D" after his name. You've said over and over that "one side had their chance and failed, now let's give the other side a chance." That's incredibly simplistic thinking.

An intelligent moderate would ignore the partisan identification of the two candidates and vote for the one who has the necessary experience and a positive record of dealing with important issues, like the economy. If you can make a logical case that Obama is more qualified than McCain to fix the financial crisis, then more power to you. You've failed to do anything of the kind so far, however. You've just resorted to lazy and unconvincing attempts to tie McCain to Bush and therefore excuse your lazy, idgit voting pattern.

[Naked Gents Rut]

When you think about it, idgits are the reason Clinton beat Bush Sr., the reason Bush Jr. beat Gore and will now be the reason Obama beat McCain. Talk about a terrible track record...

[Velociryx]

I'm sorry...was there some OTHER interpretation for "Idgit?" that I'm not aware of?

And yes...McCain's "solution" to the current pickle is more deregulation.

Now...I know I'm an idgit and all, but it seems to me that deregulation leads to black box accounting, which played a pretty large role in getting us where we are today, and it seems to this simpleton that more of the same bad medicine prolly won't fix the current problem (in fact, those who subscribe to this theory might well be termed....idgits? Mayhaps...)

So yes...perhaps a change in strategy is in order.



-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Keating Five!

What a Maverick.



-=Vel=-

[Naked Gents Rut]

And yes...McCain's "solution" to the current pickle is more deregulation.

This is demonstrably not true. McCain cosponsored a bill calling for more regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back in 2005. He's calling for more regulation now.

The first step to becoming a non-idgit voter is educating yourself.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Velociryx
And yes...McCain's "solution" to the current pickle is more deregulation.

Can I ask you a question, Vel? Why is it you and others believe that McCain/the Republican Party is in favor reckless deregulation of financial markets when the historical record indicates that they fought for greater regulation of the mortgage industry and oversight against opposition from Congressional Democrats?

[Ramo]

Bush and Greenspan blocked GSE regulation, not the evil Democrats...

As for the fairly tale that Fannie and Freddie were the root of the crisis...





Pay close attention to the ABS (asset-based securities) line. Fannie and Freddie made their fair share of errors, but behaved a lot better than their competitors in general.

[Velociryx]

Well...there you go again, Ramo, with your hatred of St. Shrub and America!

The Republicans have been in charge* of the Congress since the 104th, and have only just now lost that control.

They've been in control of the White House for the last eight years.

Where, in that time, is this push for more regulation? With the Dems out of favor and out of power, it seems that the last span of years would have been the PERFECT time to push those changes through.

Interestingly, that didn't happen.

We DID see greater deregulation though, in the form of the reforms of ’99 (guess which part controlled both houses then (hint: It rhymes with “Republican”).

* - 107th Senate was deadlocked 50/50 until Sen. Jeffords declared himself an Independent, giving the Dems a 1 seat advantage in the Senate

OoO

On a related note, I just loved this little bit, and had to post it here:


COURIC: You’ve said, quote, “John McCain will reform the way Wall Street does business.” Other than supporting stricter regulations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac two years ago, can you give us any more example of his leading the charge for more oversight?

PALIN: I think that the example that you just cited, with his warnings two years ago about Fannie and Freddie–that, that’s paramount. That’s more than a heck of a lot of other senators and representatives did for us.

COURIC: But he’s been in Congress for 26 years. He’s been chairman of the powerful Commerce Committee. And he has almost always sided with less regulation, not more.

PALIN: He’s also known as the maverick though. Taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he’s been talking about–the need to reform government.

COURIC: I’m just going to ask you one more time, not to belabor the point. Specific examples in his 26 years of pushing for more regulation?

PALIN: I’ll try to find you some and I’ll bring them to you.



-=Vel=-

[Vesayen]

Originally posted by Tuberski

Pushing back against what it calls McCain's “guilt-by-association” tactics, the Obama campaign is e-mailing millions of supporters a link to a website, KeatingEconomics.com, which will have a 13-minute documentary on the scandal beginning at noon Eastern time on Monday. The overnight e-mails urge recipients to pass the link on to friends.

Why e-mail it to his supporters? They are already going to vote for him.

It's now a one possession game.........

ACK!

Elections in America never won by converting from the other party, or independants, to vote for you.

Voter turnout is so low that it is FAR FAR FAR FAR more effective to increase the turnout of members of your own political party.

This is why pointless pandering, lying and slander is most effective. It might persuade the other party to stay home, or inflame your own party to show up.

Our political system sucks.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Velociryx
PALIN: I’ll try to find you some and I’ll bring them to you.

I hopes that if Couric is still waiting that she packed a lunch.

[Imran Siddiqui]

With the Dems out of favor and out of power, it seems that the last span of years

You mean like the last two years?

We DID see greater deregulation though, in the form of the reforms of ’99 (guess which part controlled both houses then (hint: It rhymes with “Republican”).

And the party that controlled the Presidency (hint: It rhymes with "Democratic")