• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

PoliGAF Interim Thread of 2008 Early Voting (THE FINAL COUNTDOWN: T MINUS 2 DAYS)

Status
Not open for further replies.
mamacint said:
Those types are big on symbolism and references that outside group might not get, I wonder what the significance of 102 is?

I know 88 is code for "Heil Hitler," but I dunno about 102. Google doesn't help much.
 
Monday, October 27, 2008

Rush's Blueprint
Last week, Tony Blankley published and Rush Limbaugh publicized what may prove one of the most important articles of 2008. I don't mean that the article was good - very much the contrary. But bad work can be even more important than good, if enough people can be got to believe it.

Here's Tony:

I suspect that the conservative movement we start rebuilding on the ashes of Nov. 4 (even if McCain wins) will have little use for overwritten, over-delicate commentary. The new movement will be plain-spoken and socially networked up from the Interneted streets, suburbs and small towns of America.

Here's Rush:

Since there is not a strong elected conservative anywhere, then conservatism right now is sort of like wandering in the distance with every conservative thinking that they're the smartest person in the room trying to show the way to the light. The way to the light is plainly visible. But everybody wants to be considered the smartest people in the room, so they come up with all these new things like "the era of Reagan is over."

And more Rush:

[T]here's a blueprint for winning it, 1980, there's a blueprint. McCain is not the blueprint for how Republicans win landslides. Going after moderates, independents, and all these yokels is not the blueprint. The blueprint's there, 1994, taking back the House, the blueprint's there. Why are these people ignoring it?

If I understand it correctly, the Blankley/Rush argument goes like this:

1) Reagan-style conservatism remains wildly popular with the American people. It was the "blueprint" for winning landslides between 1980 and 1994, and it remains the blueprint today.

2) Yet for some unaccountable mysterious reason, politicians are ignoring this blueprint! There is not a strong elected conservative voice in the country today.

3) So obviously what we need to do is return to the politics of the 1980s - and sit back and collect the rewards.

This argument raises one big question:

Could it be possible that the reason that we lack Reagan-style conservatives in elected office today is that they are having trouble getting elected?


Still more Rush, referring by name to people like Peggy Noonan, David Brooks, Christopher Buckley, Kathleen Parker, and me:

These are the people who are embarrassed by Sarah Palin 'cause she's not an intellectual and she didn't go to Harvard or have a college degree from approved universities and she drops her g's from words like morning and says mornin'. She's embarrassing, and I think something else really bothering these people is that they believe that she may become one of the key leaders of the conservative movement beyond 2008 if she and McCain lose this.

OK, let's develop this a little.

1) Sarah Palin has the potential to become a key leader of the conservative movement beyond 2008.

2) If that happens, she will follow "the blueprint" and achieve another conservative landslide - and another successful presidency!

3) But snobs like Peggy, David, Christopher, Kathleen and me are embarrassed that she drops her Gs. Our motto: "Unless we can nominate a Harvard graduate, we'd rather lose."

I have to wonder:

Can even Rush himself believe this junk?


I think Rush is a great entertainer and has often been a force for good in the conservative movement. But right now, he is feeding his audience pleasing illusions that can only lead conservatives to even greater troubles in the days ahead.

Take a look at this poll from Stanley Greenberg. (Yes Greenberg's a Democrat - but he's long proven himself a realistic analyst of American politics. Greenberg is the guy who identified Macomb County, Michigan, as the heartland of the "Reagan Democrats" - and warned Democrats that they were losing both Macomb and the nation.)

While a sizeable majority of voters say Republicans have lost in 2006 and 2008 because they have been “too conservative,” a sizeable plurality of Republicans say, it is because they have “not been conservative enough.”

Over three-quarters of Republicans say Palin was good choice, while a majority of the electorate says the opposite.

Two-thirds of Republicans say McCain has not been aggressive enough, but a majority of voters think they have been too aggressive.

Looking to the future, a large majority of Republicans say the party needs to “move more to the right and back to conservative principles,” while an even larger majority of all voters say, it should move to the “center to win over moderate and independent voters.”

When Rush and Blankley tell us the blueprint is there, if only we would follow it, they are telling us something that is not true. They are offering flattering illusions when we need truth. They are leading us to disaster - and beyond disaster, to irrelevance

http://frum.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OGZiODc3MThiOTg3ODZjNjM5ODk4NWJmMTU4ZDNmMmI=
 
Authorities foil plot by neo-Nazi skinheads to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Obama: Associated Press 4:35pm EDT
 
CharlieDigital said:
Sounds like bullshit to me.

Once again, a campaign volunteer signing my wife in:

rally-signin.png

They weren't denied entrance, it was a volunteer who took it upon herself to ask a couple muslim women to move so they wouldn't be in camera shot. It was an isolated incident, just something a stupid volunteer did.
 
zesty said:
I was talking to a friend of mine I had seen in awhile on Friday night and he told me his theory about Sarah Palin's youngest baby actually being Bristol's. He had some interesting reasoning. This is the same friend who has written a book about Jesus being conceived because Mary was raped, so...


your friend sounds pretty awesome. what book is that?
 
Amir0x said:
I disagree with both candidates waaay more than I agree with them, list would be too long.

I'll focus on my pet issue.

CON (both candidates):

- Refuse to support the legalization of every scheduled substance/drug.



15 points!


No thats a good thing
 
If Ted Stevens refuses to resign upon his conviction, he faces expulsion, which has been extremely rare in the history of the U.S. Senate.

Only four senators have been convicted of crimes in the 200 plus years of the chamber's history.

Here's a handy backgrounder from the Senate Web site:

Expulsion:

"Article I, Section 5, of the United States Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."

Since 1789, the Senate has expelled only 15 of its entire membership. Of that number, fourteen were charged with support of the Confederacy during the Civil War. In several other cases, the Senate considered expulsion proceedings but either found the member not guilty or failed to act before the member left office. In those cases, corruption was the primary cause of complaint."

In the entire course of the Senate's history, only four members have been convicted of crimes. They were: Joseph R. Burton (1905), John Hipple Mitchell (1905), Truman H. Newberry (1920), and Harrison Williams (1981). Newberry's conviction was later overturned. Mitchell died. Burton, Newberry, and Williams resigned before the Senate could act on their expulsion."
Should be interesting, though I assume he'll not resign as he knows he's going to lose anyway
 
More

MEMPHIS, TN (WMC-TV) - Two men have been charged with making threats against presidential candidate Barack Obama.

Daniel Cowart, 20, of Bells, Tennessee and Paul Schlesselman, 18, of West Helena were charged in a federal complaint last Friday of illegal possession of a sawed-off shotgun, conspiracy to rob a federal firearms licensee, and making threats against a major candidate for the Office of President.

According to the complaint, Cowart and Schlesselman met via the Internet through a mutual friend last month, with both men claiming to have very strong beliefs regarding "White Power" and "Skinhead" philosophies.

The complaint said the pair discussed robbing a gun shop in order to gather weapons and ammunition to use in a 'killing spree.'

On October 20, 2008, Cowart allegedly traveled from Tennessee to Arkansas to pick up Schlesselman in order to carry out their plan.

According to the complaint, the defendants further discussed their killing spree to include targeting a predominately African American school, and to continue their spree until their final act of violence, which would be to attempt to assassinate Obama.

Officials said Cowart and Schlesselman stated that they would be willing to die during their attempt.

The pair was arrested on October 22, 2008 by the Crockett County, Tennessee Sheriff's Department.

Cowart and Schlesselman appeared in court Monday, and are scheduled to appear again at a detention hearing on October 30th.
Doesn't sound like the brightest crew, but all threats are serious

Already bumped off drudge for Obama-the-socialist
 
zesty said:
I was talking to a friend of mine I had seen in awhile on Friday night and he told me his theory about Sarah Palin's youngest baby actually being Bristol's. He had some interesting reasoning. This is the same friend who has written a book about Jesus being conceived because Mary was raped, so...
rape?! in the zeroth century?! no way.....
 
Ether_Snake said:
CNN is saying that the B girl's attack was supposedly mentionned by Fox News and others before the Police was even aware of the case.


Fucking sick. They got the story from Drudge. And Drudge got it from internet hype. This just shows how much Fox News sucks.
 
Ether_Snake said:
CNN is saying that the B girl's attack was supposedly mentionned by Fox News and others before the Police was even aware of the case.


oops, somebody from McCains camp let the memo slip a little too early
 
HolyStar said:
No thats a good thing

Well clearly I can't agree with that - and I'm pretty sure I'm systematically deconstructed your argument on this very issue before - so we'll leave that to drug-GAF thread in the future.

Fjolle said:
You want every drug legalized?

Every. Last. One. + See above.
 
Fjolle said:
You want every drug legalized?

Problem? We'd also have strict regulation and labelling guidelines so people couldn't mistakenly poison themselves with the toxic substances on Schedule 1, so I think it would be okay.
 
Ether_Snake said:
CNN is saying that the B girl's attack was supposedly mentionned by Fox News and others before the Police was even aware of the case.
no doubt because they called all the news media to get them there in time for an arrest. not that surprising IMO
 
mamacint said:
Definitely not the smartest bunch, think they could shoot up a school, kill 100+ people and then get even within 20 miles of Obama.

I wonder if there will be any execution murders of blacks if Obama wins. Sounds like these retards didn't have a plan on getting to Obama but the threat of walking into a high school and blasting it up is very real.
 
Guy on CNN was all "Despite Obama's incredible ground game, he doesn't seem to be turning out people who weren't already going to vote. And McCain's camp seems to be getting an equal number of supporters who wish to vote AGAINST Obama. So while the enthusiasm may be for different reasons, we do not see any advantage for Obama's groundgame."

SMH.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom