McCain or Obama?

[GregBurch]

I haven't stopped by to fling any gasoline on the fire here recently and, since it now seems certain that Obama will win big in November, the subject is of only ironic and academic interest to me. But I thought this was somewhat interesting:

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/mems.php

 

[Urwumpe]

LOL... I would have expected a lot, but not that Lawyers are the top contributors for Obama.

 

[GregBurch]

LOL... I would have expected a lot, but not that Lawyers are the top contributors for Obama.

Knowing why that is provides one of the keys to comprehending the US political system.

 

[Urwumpe]

Knowing why that is provides one of the keys to comprehending the US political system.

Well, I don't yet. I have still problems understanding the German political system.

 

[Eagle]

Knowing why that is provides one of the keys to comprehending the US political system.

Well, I don't yet. I have still problems understanding the German political system.

Think mob-control but with safety rails. Each politician shouts, "I'm going THIS way!" and people follow. The government has just enough inertia not to do anything too crazy. Add in a few checks against personal power and you get the US government. I am defining political power as what change an individual politician (or even citizen) is capable of.

I don't know enough about Germany, but it seems to have some good analogs to the US. It seems to me that a lot of foreign governments either don't have the right amount of inertia or checks against personal power. Too much inertia or not enough personal power and the government can't respond, not enough inertia or too much personal power and it becomes unstable and wild.

The UN has too much inertia and little personal power, so it does mostly nothing.
Some Parliamentary governments have very little inertia and lots of power from the ruling party, thus the next government can be radical different from the last.

 

[GregBurch]

Well, I don't yet. I have still problems understanding the German political system.

At the most fundamental level, the logic behind such huge support behind Obama from "lawyers" generally is the fact that undertakers do well in a plague. Lawyers thrive on laws, and the expectation is that there will be a lot more laws in an Obama administration, supported by a Congress with solid Democratic majorities in both houses.

An example from history: The Carter administration got a LOT of regulation and taxation aimed at the oil and gas and energy industries through the post-Watergate, Democratically-dominated Congress. A dense thicket of regulation and "windfall profits" taxation rules made it impossible for actors in these industries to move an inch without lawyers heavily involved at every stage.

Investment in exploration, production and processing naturally fell through the floor (a result that was as predictable as night following day). But oh, what a wonderful windfall it was for lawyers (like me) who specialized in the energy industry! Every erg of energy delivered to end-users was encrusted with a flock of lawyers. Good times ahead!!! Yes, I'll pay more taxes, but my income will go up, as well. Will this extra economic activity contribute one dime toward the actual enterprise of producing energy? Nope.

A note about last night's Veep debate. As always now, with the caveat that of course an Obama victory is a foregone conclusion, note that the "experienced" Biden made some gross misstatements on foreign policy:

Joe Biden threw out a lot of bunk on foreign policy tonight, too bad Gov Palin didn’t have the foreign policy wonkishness to call him on it. Most ridiculous and downright strange was his contention that the Bush administration let Hezbollah into Lebanon, and then when “we threw them out” – whatever that means, he and Obama said NATO should go in but nobody took them up on it and now Hezbollah was all over Lebanon and that’s a problem. What?
Well, Hezbollah’s been there since the early 1980’s of course, blossoming throughout the 1990’s to become now over a third of the population of Lebanon with 2 cabinet members, a host of parliamentarians, and schools, clinics, and basically an entirely separate governance infrastructure in all of southern Lebanon and elsewhere. I suppose the throwing out of Hezbollah was the dismal and failed Israeli campaign of 2006 which dislodged nothing? Or was it Israeli’s occupation of Southern Lebanon from 1982 – 1999? Don’t remember an Obama position on NATO replacing Israeli occupation then. As for NATO going in after the 2006 debacle, well, I’m the one who rounded up 8,000 French and Italians and a few thousand other Euros to go into Southern Lebanon along with an assortment of others in August 2006 and while working that issue for about 40 straight days I don’t remember a peep from Biden or Obama about NATO – which wouldn’t be budged despite our intense pressure in Mons. So, we went straight to Rome and Paris. Que sera, sera.
​

I daresay you will see almost no discussion of this in the mainstream media. Had Palin made equivalent gaffes, it would be all "Caribou Barbie" all the time.

 

[Urwumpe]

I daresay you will see almost no discussion of this in the mainstream media. Had Palin made equivalent gaffes, it would be all "Caribou Barbie" all the time.

What should be discussed? That the Hesbollah became stronger after the Israeli attacks as before?

What is McCains strategy against his enemies? Except avoiding them?

 

[GregBurch]

What should be discussed? That the Hesbollah became stronger after the Israeli attacks as before?

What is McCains strategy against his enemies? Except avoiding them?

Try for just a second to drop the partisanship, ok? My point was that Biden completely mangled the history. He'll get a complete pass on this -- no serious criticism from the press at all, mark my words. Had Palin done this, we'd be hearing about it wall to wall.

My point was about process, not substance.

On substance, your side is going to win, OK? I concede. I give up. You win. How about a little noblesse oblige?

 

[Urwumpe]

Try for just a second to drop the partisanship, ok? My point was that Biden completely mangled the history. He'll get a complete pass on this -- no serious criticism from the press at all, mark my words. Had Palin done this, we'd be hearing about it wall to wall.

Or not... if I remember correctly, she did also say enough from the official republican history of the world. Seeing her talk made me almost search for the small black sticks on her arms.

My point was about process, not substance.

The process is the same as always in elections: If things can be interpreted, they are free for getting turned into anything you like. Only the facts remain. And journalists can complain a lot, when facts are made wrong, but they enter the realm of editorials, when they complain about interpretations.

So, the question is, what are you fighting (and diplomatically retreating) for? That there should be only one valid interpretation of the facts of history?

 

[ar81]

Save the American citizens, not the banks...
No more republican socialism...:lol:

 

[GregBurch]

Or not... if I remember correctly, she did also say enough from the official republican history of the world. Seeing her talk made me almost search for the small black sticks on her arms.

Once again you say something that makes me wish my father's generation had listened to Joe Kennedy and Charles Lindbergh.

 

[Urwumpe]

Once again you say something that makes me wish my father's generation had listened to Joe Kennedy and Charles Lindbergh.

You mean the people, who said that no intervention at all is better as a bad one? And who supported appeasement, even when the facts had already been made?

Extremism is always a bad guide.

 

[GregBurch]

You mean the people, who said that no intervention at all is better as a bad one? And who supported appeasement, even when the facts had already been made?

Extremism is always a bad guide.

You're right, and of course I don't really wish my Dad had listened to Kennedy and Lindbergh. But, honestly, I think the possibility of dialogue at this point is too small to be worth pursuing. The kind of outrageous insult you flung above makes me think that there just aren't enough shared values, and the branch between our two roads lies too far back to reach common ground.

I do find it fascinating that such insults are regular fare here when it comes to politics, but a similar comment in terms of religion ... well, we know about that ...

 

[garyw]

Personally, I don't like either, but I'd rather see Obama in the White House instead of Mr. War machine, John McCain.

McCain isn't a problem. It's the religious nut job Sarah Palin that has me worried.
Obama all the way.

 

[Eagle]

Ka'POW! Tonight's debate is brutal. I wouldn't have been surprised if the candidates ended up in a fist fight.

Also, I think both candidates promised me pretty much everything.:hmm:

 

[Cairan]

That's it. Obama is going to win. Not by a huge landslide, but if trends in several states continue or just stabilise, McCain will have to win every single "battleground" states. For one, Ohio is going to tilt towards Obama in my opinion. Virginia and North Carolina are probably going to tip back to McCain before the campaign is over, Colorado and/or Nevada as well.

But that's not going to cut it for McCain. He really needed to completely reverse the tide tonight.

 

[Zachstar]

McCain lost his 2nd best chance to slow Obama tonight. The next debate will likely not give him the advantage he needs either.

As long as people actually vote. This thing is just about over in my view. As McCain has to play defensive for the next valuable few days to a week about comments and actions during the debate (Which could have have come at a worse time for him as he is fighting allegations of a "dirty" campaign) Obama will continue to hit hard on economic issues and that will lead him to victory in November.

Landslide? Not really as you need to take Florida AND Ohio to win a landslide and indications are more than likely he will only get Ohio. He stands as much of a chance of getting a landslide as McCain does at getting those 2 states and the multitude of others AND managing to get several Obama leaning states.

 

[replicant]

McCain isn't a problem. It's the religious nut job Sarah Palin that has me worried.
Obama all the way.

Careful, I have been slammed many times on that issue. Being a Palin detractor seems to get one the title of America hating liberal.

Ka'POW! Tonight's debate is brutal. I wouldn't have been surprised if the candidates ended up in a fist fight.

I thought the same thing. I almost wanted to see it.

McCain lost his 2nd best chance to slow Obama tonight. The next debate will likely not give him the advantage he needs either.

As long as people actually vote. This thing is just about over in my view. As McCain has to play defensive for the next valuable few days to a week about comments and actions during the debate (Which could have have come at a worse time for him as he is fighting allegations of a "dirty" campaign) Obama will continue to hit hard on economic issues and that will lead him to victory in November.

Landslide? Not really as you need to take Florida AND Ohio to win a landslide and indications are more than likely he will only get Ohio. He stands as much of a chance of getting a landslide as McCain does at getting those 2 states and the multitude of others AND managing to get several Obama leaning states.

Agreed, it will be close, and I still beleive it isn't over until it's over. Never underestimate you opponents, never slow down and give them a breather. When they slow down, don't slow down, run harder and faster, never ever ever think you have won, until you have won.

The character stuff was interesting as well. McCain comes off very badly. I don't know about anyone else, but comments and body language and tone tell me this is what might be in McCain's mind right now. "This is mine @#$$%%. I can't beleive I lost eight years ago to that stupid little weasel and now I'm going to lose to this filthy @#$$%!" That is the message I read from McCain tonight.

 

[garyw]

Careful, I have been slammed many times on that issue. Being a Palin detractor seems to get one the title of America hating liberal.

:lol: I've been called worse.

I don't particular care if they are liberal, conservative or any one of the million or so other labels. What I do not want to see is someone with that much power who preaches on about religion to the point of fanaticism. Don't we have enough of that in the world already?

Besides, Religion doesn't seem to have been of any help in any of the scandals in which she has been involved........

I believe the Obama camp called her a rottweiler with lipstick. Sounds about right to me.

 

[Cairan]

I believe the Obama camp called her a rottweiler with lipstick. Sounds about right to me.

Actually that's her self description... From Palin herself:

You know what the difference between a pitbull and a hockey mom is? (points to her mouth) Lipstick.

The door was wide open for jokes and canine references...