fayfreethinkers.com

Betsy wrote:Does anyone REALLY want a president who can't check his own email in the 21st Century?

We already have one. And your Uncle Jim and 30% of the American public is too dense to see what a problem that is. And furthermore, they think it's great.

Tony wrote:On Biden as the VP: This makes tons of sense. Nominating Hillary would have been great for us on the Left and the Democratic Party in general but NOT for the country. Seriously, we all know that racism and sexism are still a big part of this country.

DOUG
Yes, but if that were the overriding factor, Obama would not be winning.

The fact is, Hillary would have automatically brought in millions of votes for Obama, putting Obama over the top in a number of close states. She would have guaranteed a win.

DAR
Four minute Greenwald clip about McCain's ten homes.

D.

So McCain picks a woman governor from Alaska to be his running mate. Does he think that by choosing a woman running mate he will win over all the Hillary supporters?

Does he really think people are THAT stupid, that they just vote based on gender, regardless of the vast policy differences of the party?

Are they that stupid?

DAR
This is AMAZING! Talk about desperate. This is sooooo obvious. How can everyone not see through this? I am very pleasantly surprised. I really don't think this is going to work.

D.

Not to mention he just totally invalidated his inexperience argument against Obama.

Right, after all the rhetoric about needing to be able to take office on DAY ONE, he goes and chooses her - simply because she's a woman. And I read she's a strong pro-lifer.

"Pro-life" - I don't like that label because it's not accurate. I'm "pro-life" too, but I'm against criminalization of abortion.

Tim

Betsy wrote: So McCain picks a woman governor from Alaska to be his running mate. Does he think that by choosing a woman running mate he will win over all the Hillary supporters?

DOUG
Yes. He thinks he can get enough of a percentage to put him ahead of Obama.

Betsy wrote:Does he really think people are THAT stupid, that they just vote based on gender, regardless of the vast policy differences of the party?

DOUG
Yes, he thinks people are that stupid. After all, just look at the whoppers on Faux News. Their average viewer is so stupid that 40% of them think we found the WMDs in Iraq. Because Faux News told them so. So they must think that most people in the U.S. are as stupid as Faux News viewers. Fortunately, they are not. (But not by much, unfortunately.)

Betsy wrote:Are they that stupid?

DOUG
Yes. But here is their plan. They have been working hard at creating the false impression that many women who supported Hillary are so angry at the DNC that they will vote for McCain now, and even though this is a small group, the GOP is going to parade woman after woman, in their TV commercials, stating that they are lifelong Democrats that are now switching to vote for McCain. It is a bogus scenario, but it is perhaps their best chance.

Which means that the GOP has very little chance.

Betsy wrote:Does he really think people are THAT stupid, that they just vote based on gender, regardless of the vast policy differences of the party?

I've seen enough of what comes across as androgyny from female (and male) Hillary supporters that he might really think that.

Betsy wrote:Are they that stupid?

Some probably are. At the very introduction, Palin targeted Hillaryphiles by honoring her. That's their game plan because it just might work. Plus, now they will make the same not-jaded-by-traditional-Washington-politics argument that Obama has been using.

Darrel wrote:How can everyone not see through this?

Because not everyone isn't stupid, and not everyone isn't so pissed off at Hillary's loss that they're full of spite.

Let's be honest: it's SUCH a ridiculous stunt that I find myself wondering if her resignation is already planned. After she's brought in Hillaryphile votes, nobody wants her there.

ChristianLoeschel wrote:Not to mention he just totally invalidated his inexperience argument against Obama.

I'm guessing he'll try to rely on the fact that he (McCain) as the Presidential nominee has the experience while the other Presidential nominee doesn't. Remember: we know that their arguments don't have to (and therefore rarely do) make sense. Still, it'd be easy to spin that against him because his age and health problems make a VP's assumption of office much more likely.

tmiller51 wrote:I'm "pro-life" too, but I'm against criminalization of abortion.

This is why I prefer the label "anti-choice." Besides, forcing women to be slaves to their fetuses is certainly not my idea of "life" the way women want it.