The Great News For Republicans Tonight

James81 said:

That's not the point.

With McCain, you KNEW nothing was going to change. There was no question that change was NOT coming in any shape or form.

With Obama, there is the chance.

Even if you think it's a small chance, there's at least the chance.

Chance of change > No hope for change

Click to expand...

Well, that's the message the Democrats put over so convincingly, anyway. As for it's truth? Who knows?

James81 said:

That's not the point.

With McCain, you KNEW nothing was going to change.

Click to expand...

I didn't know that. I actually believed something close to the opposite of that.

There was no question that change was NOT coming in any shape or form.

Click to expand...

Change you would disagree with /= no change

With Obama, there is the chance.

Even if you think it's a small chance, there's at least the chance.

Click to expand...

There's also the chance that it was all talk, and when the burdens of the office are firmly on his shoulders, that the change he promised will be unfeasible.

Don said:

WTF!!!

I woke up this morning and checked my gas tank... still on almost empty.
Logged on and checked my mortgage... it hasn't gone down a penny!

I thought Obama was going to take care of all that.

ETA: Just checked my bank balance. Only change left. Now I understand.

Click to expand...

I was told over in OP I had to wait for the end of January the fill-up and the mortgage payments to start. Be patient, Don. We've waited this long, we can wait a little longer.

Roger J Carlson said:

Well, that's the message the Democrats put over so convincingly, anyway. As for it's truth? Who knows?

Click to expand...

I like how you worded that in such a way as if:

1. I am a Democrat (I'm registered Republican)
2. I did not do any actual research and just listened to MSNBC to arrive at my decision (see my thread history for a much overlooked thread about making an informed decision)

MattW said:

I didn't know that. I actually believed something close to the opposite of that.

Change you would disagree with /= no change

There's also the chance that it was all talk, and when the burdens of the office are firmly on his shoulders, that the change he promised will be unfeasible.

Click to expand...

All I had to go on was McCain's record. And his record showed enormous support for Bush policies.

Granted, maybe he'd throw away 8 years of support to chart a new direction, but it sure as hell didn't sound that way in the debates. *shrug*

If you listened to Obama's speech last night, he out and out said that he can't do it alone.

There would have been change regardless of who was elected. Our current situation demands it. When you get right down to it, domestically there wasn't a hell of a lot of difference between the two candidates. They both proposed broad, sweeping spending programs and didn't come up with a way to pay for them.

*shrug*

To think that McCain would have followed Bush's course blindly is disingenuous to say the least. By the same token, to think that Obama's course is drastically different from the one McCain proposed is equally so.

James81 said:

All I had to go on was McCain's record. And his record showed enormous support for Bush policies.

Granted, maybe he'd throw away 8 years of support to chart a new direction, but it sure as hell didn't sound that way in the debates. *shrug*

Click to expand...

You've got to play the game and win in order to change the rules. As far as getting the message out, McCain did fail at differentiating himself enough without alienating the 3 Bush supporters still out there.

mscelina said:

to think that Obama's course is drastically different from the one McCain proposed is equally so.

Click to expand...

Yeah, they just differ drastically on issues such as the War, Health Care, taxes, and foreign relations.

No biggie.

James81 said:

I like how you worded that in such a way as if:

1. I am a Democrat (I'm registered Republican)
2. I did not do any actual research and just listened to MSNBC to arrive at my decision (see my thread history for a much overlooked thread about making an informed decision)

Click to expand...

I like how you worded that in such a way as if:

1. I said anything about you or your political affiliation.
2. I said you didn't do any research.

Fact is, you made a positive statement that "With McCain, you KNEW nothing was going to change. There was no question that change was NOT coming in any shape or form." This is a false statement on the face of it because everyone does not know this.

I made two completely truthful statements that 1) the Democrats made a convincing argument that it was true, and 2) we will never know whether it was actually true.

Please don't put words in my mouth that I did not say.

Roger J Carlson said:

I like how you worded that in such a way as if:

1. I said anything about you or your political affiliation.
2. I said you didn't do any research.

Fact is, you made a positive statement that "With McCain, you KNEW nothing was going to change. There was no question that change was NOT coming in any shape or form." This is a false statement on the face of it because everyone does not know this.

I made two completely truthful statements that 1) the Democrats made a convincing argument that it was true, and 2) we will never know whether it was actually true.

Please don't put words in my mouth that I did not say.

Click to expand...

Just criticizing the condescending nature of your statement.

maestrowork said:

I'd rather have promises and hope than business as usual, since we know the last 8 years didn't work.

Why are people SO frigging afraid of change anyway? My life has been a constant kaleidoscope of changes, and I've done very well so far, thank you very much.

Click to expand...

I am not afraid. I just think the promises are empty or not feasible. Also change for the sake of change isn't necessarily good and hope doesn't mean much when promises are empty or not feasible.

johnnysannie said:

So you would rather hang tight to the status quo rather than hope for change?

Click to expand...

What? you would rather cling to hope for change that won't come or won't be what you expected?

MattW said:

More like realistic that change is much easier to talk about than deliver.

Click to expand...

What he said.

James81 said:

That's not the point.

With McCain, you KNEW nothing was going to change. There was no question that change was NOT coming in any shape or form.

With Obama, there is the chance.

Even if you think it's a small chance, there's at least the chance.

Chance of change > No hope for change

Click to expand...

You can't know what everyone else thinks for knows. Like I said I didn't like McCain much either, but I didn't think he'd be W2.

James81 said:

Just criticizing the condescending nature of your statement.

Click to expand...

Oh. Well then, falsely characterizing me is entirely different.

How is what you just said, James, not condescending?

James81 said:

Yeah, they just differ drastically on issues such as the War, Health Care, taxes, and foreign relations.

No biggie.

Click to expand...

LMAO! As I said 'domestically' perhaps you should amend your statement. Especially since there are no fundamental differences between the candidates on health care. And as for taxes, well, what Obama promised and what he'll be able to do are vastly different.

Perhaps you should have read both platforms before you commented on them. just sayin'...koolaid may taste good but it's still not good for you.

Children, behave....

James81 said:

I like how you worded that in such a way as if:

1. I am a Democrat (I'm registered Republican)
2. I did not do any actual research and just listened to MSNBC to arrive at my decision (see my thread history for a much overlooked thread about making an informed decision)



All I had to go on was McCain's record. And his record showed enormous support for Bush policies.

Granted, maybe he'd throw away 8 years of support to chart a new direction, but it sure as hell didn't sound that way in the debates. *shrug*

If you listened to Obama's speech last night, he out and out said that he can't do it alone.

Click to expand...

*cracks knuckles and adjusts Arby hat*

I just want to say that assuming what people are saying is a dangerous way to conduct a conversation. Roger has said that you've put words in his mouth, for example, James, with your post above.

I think a better approach, folks, would be to ask questions and get clarification before assuming someone has said something. A lot easier to be civil and avoid misunderstandings all the way around that way.

And let's try to take the "you" out of the equation?

All right then, let's get back on track. Don't make me pull this thread over.

Pull it over, Cranky. The hitchhiker in the back seat is annoying.

What was the original topic?

Oh Yeah, I agree with Billy, I'm not too fussed since I didn't like McCain much either.

There's proactive change and then there's reactive change. With McCain or Obama, we'd experience reactive change. The question is how they handle it. When we have natural disasters and terrorist attacks in the U.S. and when Russia or North Korea decide to invade another country or civil war engulfs all of Africa or when any one of a million social or economic disasters play out - then we'll see reactive change. Then we'll see what kind of gompers the president has.

It's not just the president. It's the people the president enlists and surrounds himself/herself with. And it's also not so much what the President knows, but the kind of reasoned judgment he or she would assert by critical analysis, etc. instead of instinctively placing one hand on the red button and another on the guns.

That's why it'd be interesting to see whom Obama will be picking for key positions such as CoS, Defense Secretary, Treasury Secretary, etc. Because these are the people who will matter. This is not a one man's job, and Obama knows that.

I'm very interested to see who his cabinet picks are. They will be a strong indication of whether his change mantra was just a slogan or a political reality.

It's not just the president. It's the people the president enlists and surrounds himself/herself with. And it's also not so much what the President knows, but the kind of reasoned judgment he or she would assert by critical analysis, etc. instead of instinctively placing one hand on the red button and another on the guns.

Click to expand...

Exactly. And this goes for Bush, Clinton and anyone else who has held office. You cannot blame Bush for all of America's problems and you cannot entirely blame/give credit to Obama for what is to come.

Seriously, I cannot begin to express how weary the Republican vs. Democrat issue makes me. During Bush's last two years, the Repub administration was butting heads with the Dem majority in the House/Senate.

Now that there is a Dem majority all around, I do believe things will change. There is more opportunity for the administration to be agreeable. This violates some of the checks and balances, maybe, and I'm not saying the Dems are going to fix us or run us to the ground, either. But for goodness sake, if they can't do it, I can't stand America pointing fingers anymore because then we will accomplish nothing.

And that's why I voted Obama. I didn't vote for the democrat, or for change or for hope. I cast my vote for unity, and I'm holding my breath for the day America can at least agree to talk to one another.

And that's why I voted Obama. I didn't vote for the democrat, or for change or for hope. I cast my vote for unity, and I'm holding my breath for the day America can at least agree to talk to one another.

Click to expand...

Spiritually, ecumenically, grammatically.


(Sorry- it's just that your sig fed so well into that statment. )