John McCain Sucks

[dalegg 143]

Not exactly a shoe-in, but the Democrats as a Party are having the WH practically handed to them on silver platter, thanks to Dubbya. That's all I'm saying.

That sounds the same thing to me.

[GaryC 7]

The Republicans have a slim to none chance of winning back the WH this November, and they can all thank that yahoo who's in office right now for that.

Everytime I see someone make a statement like this it amazes me, because what you are basically saying is that Obama is a Shoe-In to win the Presidency.

You have got to be kidding me if you actually believe that Obama is a lock to win. Say it to yourself. "The first African American President, who is one of the most liberal candidates ever to make it to the general election, is a shoe in to win"

Come on man. It could happen, and I wouldn't be shocked if it did, but if it does it will be by a narrow margin.

Not exactly a shoe-in, but the Democrats as a Party are having the WH practically handed to them on silver platter, thanks to Dubbya. That's all I'm saying.

Care to put your money where your mouth is? If your so sure then a $100 bet is a gift from me. Come on, put up or shut up.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

The Republicans have a slim to none chance of winning back the WH this November, and they can all thank that yahoo who's in office right now for that.

Everytime I see someone make a statement like this it amazes me, because what you are basically saying is that Obama is a Shoe-In to win the Presidency.

You have got to be kidding me if you actually believe that Obama is a lock to win. Say it to yourself. "The first African American President, who is one of the most liberal candidates ever to make it to the general election, is a shoe in to win"

Come on man. It could happen, and I wouldn't be shocked if it did, but if it does it will be by a narrow margin.

It amazes me too since the guys couldn't even lock the nomination of his own party on Super Tuesday

The Republicans have a slim to none chance of winning back the WH this November, and they can all thank that yahoo who's in office right now for that.

I would agree that the Republicans wouldn't have a chance if they were not running against a party with leaders who are idiots. The DNC and Howard Dean decided to ignore two large states, Florida and Michigan. What were they thinking? Would the republicans who are a majority in Florida's legislature back down or push forward and let the demwits take the fall. Most of the voters in Florida blame the DNC. That's not to say the republicans aren't w/o idiots too,,,hey, maybe the demwits do have a chance this fall after all, look who was elected about 8 years ago.

This is what I have been saying for some time

The Republicans have a slim to none chance of winning back the WH this November, and they can all thank that yahoo who's in office right now for that.

Everytime I see someone make a statement like this it amazes me, because what you are basically saying is that Obama is a Shoe-In to win the Presidency.

You have got to be kidding me if you actually believe that Obama is a lock to win. Say it to yourself. "The first African American President, who is one of the most liberal candidates ever to make it to the general election, is a shoe in to win"

Come on man. It could happen, and I wouldn't be shocked if it did, but if it does it will be by a narrow margin.

Not exactly a shoe-in, but the Democrats as a Party are having the WH practically handed to them on silver platter, thanks to Dubbya. That's all I'm saying.

You could have said the same thing in 2004. No one is better at screwing up a sure thing like the Democrats, even without Hillary Clinton.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This here sez it all...

The Next President, Revealed

Economic formulas are proving to be better at predicting the presidency than opinion polls. Why the Republicans are in trouble.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/eco...ential-Election

Care to put your money where your mouth is? If your so sure then a $100 bet is a gift from me. Come on, put up or shut up.

WHOOOOOHOOOOO! I love it! Finally getting Gary to focus on the general election where the Republicans are going to getting their arses handed to them.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Like one big nail in the coffin...

Bush: McCain "Is Not Going To Change" My Foreign Policy

At the White House today, President Bush threw his support behind Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). In a press conference after a private lunch, a reporter asked the duo how McCain would "make the case that you're going to provide the change that the voters seem to want."

Bush quickly cut in, declaring that McCain is "not going to change":

BUSH: And the good news about our candidate there will be a new president, a man of character and courage, but

he's not going to change when it comes to taking on the enemy

. He understands this is a dangerous world.

Following up on the press conference, Rich Lowry of the National Review said on Fox News that Bush is framing McCain as embracing his old platforms, "someone determined absolutely to take on our enemy and someone with a big heart who cares for those who hurt." Lowry said McCain was shaping up to be Bush's "successor":

Who does that sound like? A 'compassionate conservative' who wants to take on our enemies.

It sounds like George W. Bush. … That's obviously the way he views John McCain, as a successor to himself

.

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/05/mccain-bush-change/

[GaryC 7]

This here sez it all...

The Next President, Revealed

Economic formulas are proving to be better at predicting the presidency than opinion polls. Why the Republicans are in trouble.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/eco...ential-Election

Care to put your money where your mouth is? If your so sure then a $100 bet is a gift from me. Come on, put up or shut up.

WHOOOOOHOOOOO! I love it! Finally getting Gary to focus on the general election where the Republicans are going to getting their arses handed to them.

Yeah? So we have a bet then?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This here sez it all...

The Next President, Revealed

Economic formulas are proving to be better at predicting the presidency than opinion polls. Why the Republicans are in trouble.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/eco...ential-Election

Care to put your money where your mouth is? If your so sure then a $100 bet is a gift from me. Come on, put up or shut up.

WHOOOOOHOOOOO! I love it! Finally getting Gary to focus on the general election where the Republicans are going to getting their arses handed to them.

Yeah? So we have a bet then?

I won't bet money...but I'll wager a hand painted animation cel (was given to me when I worked on the Dilbert Show)...if you have something comparible to wager. Whaddya say?

Edit: I'll take a digital photo of it this weekend so you can see it.

Edited April 12, 2008 by Mister Fancypants

[GaryC 7]

This here sez it all...

The Next President, Revealed

Economic formulas are proving to be better at predicting the presidency than opinion polls. Why the Republicans are in trouble.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/eco...ential-Election

Man you should really check out who you post stories from. The author of your story is a guy named John Cassidy.

Here is a little story about him.

September 15, 2007

John Cassidy Makes His Play for the Stupidest Man Alive Crown

He is definitely a contender: he writes apropos of Alan Greenspan:

Alan Greenspan Age of Turbulence - Portfolio.com: As the speculative fever raged, some old-timers and sticks-in-the-mud, myself included, urged Greenspan to raise interest rates and tighten margin requirements. He refused, on the grounds that bubbles are impossible to identify definitively. Pricking them is by no means easy, and even if you succeed, the consequences are far from certain. The best course of action, Greenspan argued, was to let a bubble deflate of its own accord. Then, and only then, you take remedial action by cutting interest rates. That was what he did. Following the stock market slump and the events of September 11, 2001, he cut the federal funds rate to 1.75 percent, a level that had not been seen since the early 1960s. Then, in June 2003, he reduced the rate even further, to 1 percent.... By the middle of 2002, however, it was clear that for whatever reason—-low interest rates, the Bush tax cuts, increased military spending—the economy was staging an amazingly robust recovery. At that point, history and economic orthodoxy suggested that the Fed should have been tightening policy rather than loosening it. Again, Greenspan went his own way...

Actually, it was not clear at all by the middle of 2002 that the economy was staging an "amazingly robust recovery." The recovery did not become anything anybody could call "robust" in any sense until 2004. Want evidence that it was not clear in mid-2002 that the recovery was "robust"? Here is what Paul Krugman was writing at the time:

July 23, 2002: Living With Bears: The bull market is now well and truly over. In fact, if you adjust for inflation the S.&P.... is now below its level in late 1996, when Alan Greenspan gave his famous "irrational exuberance" speech. So what should the responsible officials -- Mr. Greenspan, George W. Bush and whatshisname, the Treasury secretary -- be doing?

A good first step would be to stop trying to talk up the market by extolling the economy's fundamental strength... the fundamentals aren't actually all that great.... [E]ven before the sudden plunge in the markets, the data were pointing not to a boom but to a ''jobless recovery,'' in which the economy grows too slowly to make much if any dent in the unemployment rate. Indeed, the report prepared in support of Mr. Greenspan's recent testimony projected no significant decline in unemployment this year, and not much decline next year. And in the face of plunging markets we have to worry whether even that forecast is overly optimistic.

Given the definitely iffy economic outlook, shouldn't Mr. Greenspan be thinking seriously about another interest rate cut? True, rates are already very low. But if there's one thing we've learned from Japan's experience, it is that when you face the risk of a deflationary trap -- still not the most likely scenario, but not as unlikely as it seemed a few months ago -- it makes no sense to "save your ammunition," holding interest rate cuts in reserve. The time to fight deflation is before it has time to get built into the nation's psychology. True, the Fed has been concerned that another cut would panic the markets. But now that the markets have panicked on their own, there's nothing to lose...

August 16, 2002: Mind the Gap: [T]he [late 1990s] bubble years left us with too much capacity, too much debt and a backlog of business scandal. We shouldn't have expected a quick and easy recovery, and we're not getting one.... A loud chorus is already shouting "We're not Japan!" Half the time... I'm part of that chorus. But... [if] we do have a housing bubble, and it bursts, we'll be looking a lot too Japanese for comfort. A recent Federal Reserve analysis of Japan's experience declares that the key mistake Japan made in the early 1990's was... "that they did not take out sufficient insurance against downside risks through a precautionary further loosening of monetary policy." That's Fedspeak for "if you think deflation is even a possibility, throw money at the economy now and don't worry about overdoing it." And yet the Fed chose not to cut rates on Tuesday. Why?...

John Cassidy shouldn't tell lies: he shouldn't claim things were clear when they were not clear at all. His nose will grow.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

But wait! There is more. Cassidy writes:

In February, [Greenspan] said a recession was possible before the end of 2007—a comment that contributed to a 416-point fall in the Dow. In May, he put the chances of a recession at one in three.... Greenspan may have been acting strategically. His appearances in the headlines haven’t harmed the commercial prospects of his book, and they may have attracted some clients to Greenspan Associates, the consulting firm that he founded upon leaving the Fed. It was noticeable that shortly after he started using the R-word, Pacific Investment Management, which oversees the world’s largest bond fund, hired him as a consultant. Pimco’s chief investment officer, Bill Gross, is well-known for his bearish views on the economy and the stock market...

It never occurs to Cassidy that Greenspan said there was a chance of recession because... there is a chance of recession. No, that would be too simple! Instead, Greenspan is "acting strategically." Menzie Chinn notes that current betting odds on recession are between 2-1 and 50-50.

http://delong.typepad.com/delong_economics...cassidy-ma.html

This here sez it all...

The Next President, Revealed

Economic formulas are proving to be better at predicting the presidency than opinion polls. Why the Republicans are in trouble.

http://www.portfolio.com/views/columns/eco...ential-Election

Care to put your money where your mouth is? If your so sure then a $100 bet is a gift from me. Come on, put up or shut up.

WHOOOOOHOOOOO! I love it! Finally getting Gary to focus on the general election where the Republicans are going to getting their arses handed to them.

Yeah? So we have a bet then?

I won't bet money...but I'll wager a hand painted animation cel (was given to me when I worked on the Dilbert Show)...if you have something comparible to wager. Whaddya say?

Edit: I'll take a digital photo of it this weekend so you can see it.

Whats wrong with cash? I doubt if I have anything that you would want. Come on, go with your convictions!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, First...I'm egging you on a bit, but seriously - two factors that are going to have more of an impact on the outcome of this election irrespective of the candidates....the war in Iraq and the economy. On those two issues, McCain is on the losing end, in terms of what the voters want changed.

This here sez it all...

I won't bet money...but I'll wager a hand painted animation cel (was given to me when I worked on the Dilbert Show)...if you have something comparible to wager. Whaddya say?

Edit: I'll take a digital photo of it this weekend so you can see it.

Whats wrong with cash? I doubt if I have anything that you would want. Come on, go with your convictions!

That's my wager...take it or leave it.

[GaryC 7]

Gary, First...I'm egging you on a bit, but seriously - two factors that are going to have more of an impact on the outcome of this election irrespective of the candidates....the war in Iraq and the economy. On those two issues, McCain is on the losing end, in terms of what the voters want changed.

This here sez it all...

I won't bet money...but I'll wager a hand painted animation cel (was given to me when I worked on the Dilbert Show)...if you have something comparible to wager. Whaddya say?

Edit: I'll take a digital photo of it this weekend so you can see it.

Whats wrong with cash? I doubt if I have anything that you would want. Come on, go with your convictions!

That's my wager...take it or leave it.

I really don't have anything along that nature to offer. I lost all my good stuff in my divorce.

Ok, I will make it easy for you. Tell me what that cell would be worth and I will put cash against it.

I do have one thing though I doubt if you would want it. I have an autographed picture of Rush.

Edited April 12, 2008 by GaryC

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, First...I'm egging you on a bit, but seriously - two factors that are going to have more of an impact on the outcome of this election irrespective of the candidates....the war in Iraq and the economy. On those two issues, McCain is on the losing end, in terms of what the voters want changed.

This here sez it all...

I won't bet money...but I'll wager a hand painted animation cel (was given to me when I worked on the Dilbert Show)...if you have something comparible to wager. Whaddya say?

Edit: I'll take a digital photo of it this weekend so you can see it.

Whats wrong with cash? I doubt if I have anything that you would want. Come on, go with your convictions!

That's my wager...take it or leave it.

I really don't have anything along that nature to offer. I lost all my good stuff in my divorce.

Ok, I will make it easy for you. Tell me what that cell would be worth and I will put cash against it.

I do have one thing though I doubt if you would want it. I have an autographed picture of Rush.

...on the Rush Limbaugh autograph. I have no idea what it is worth now, but hand painted cels can go for about $300 or more depending on where it's from. I could sign it and add value to it. If you're willing to bet cash against it, but I don't want you to bet that much money.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Do we really want a Junior Senator in the White House who has built his campaign on promises of change but never clearly defines it other than to say that America is heading in the wrong direction and he can unite us? Sounds like candidate Bush in 2000. Universal health care will never be a reality because as a nation we cant afford it. Nancy Pelosi was supposed to change the way congress does business too.

The election will be a process of choosing the least negative and with regard to McCain, he would be the biggest negative.

Not sure the HC supporters think that....

It would be if Obama gets the nomination.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/105691/McCain-v...ers-McCain.aspx

Chalk it up to sore losers.

See I'm not sure I really understand that - On pretty much every issue McCain is poles apart from both Clinton and Obama. So why would Democrats would rather vote for the Republican candidate who represents few (if any) of their interests?

[GaryC 7]

Gary, First...I'm egging you on a bit, but seriously - two factors that are going to have more of an impact on the outcome of this election irrespective of the candidates....the war in Iraq and the economy. On those two issues, McCain is on the losing end, in terms of what the voters want changed.

This here sez it all...

I won't bet money...but I'll wager a hand painted animation cel (was given to me when I worked on the Dilbert Show)...if you have something comparible to wager. Whaddya say?

Edit: I'll take a digital photo of it this weekend so you can see it.

Whats wrong with cash? I doubt if I have anything that you would want. Come on, go with your convictions!

That's my wager...take it or leave it.

I really don't have anything along that nature to offer. I lost all my good stuff in my divorce.

Ok, I will make it easy for you. Tell me what that cell would be worth and I will put cash against it.

I do have one thing though I doubt if you would want it. I have an autographed picture of Rush.

...on the Rush Limbaugh autograph. I have no idea what it is worth now, but hand painted cels can go for about $300 or more depending on where it's from. I could sign it and add value to it. If you're willing to bet cash against it, but I don't want you to bet that much money.

I didn't think you would want my Rush picture. It's a shame. I had a collection of about 100 autographed pictures from movie and TV stars. I also had the entire cast of Star Trek, Next Generation, Voyager and Deep space nine. I had Marlina Dietrich, Clint Eastwood, John Wayne, Jimmy Stewart and many more. My ex got them.

But back to your Dilbert cel. Ok you got a deal. Here is the ebay page that has a bunch of them. You pick out what closest matches yours and I will back it with the Buy it Now price.

http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZnigelwackenfrets

[mawilson 2,133]

I think you didn't word it clearly. I meant that (many) HC supporters would pick McC over Obama in November.

Why? Hillary and Obama have essentially no policy differences between them.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Do we really want a Junior Senator in the White House who has built his campaign on promises of change but never clearly defines it other than to say that America is heading in the wrong direction and he can unite us? Sounds like candidate Bush in 2000. Universal health care will never be a reality because as a nation we cant afford it. Nancy Pelosi was supposed to change the way congress does business too.

The election will be a process of choosing the least negative and with regard to McCain, he would be the biggest negative.

Not sure the HC supporters think that....

...yeah, I guess they rater put a guy into the White House who will work his hardest to make sure that the Supreme Court is stacked right to get Roe vs. Wade overturned and women lose the reproductive rights they currently have. Any true feminist would do that, right?