Legit reasons why you shouldn't vote Republican (McSame) this year

[Stormin' Norman]

the nail in Obama's coffin was Palin. It's clear.

It's over.

I'm willing to bet all my points on a MCCAIN victory.

[Vladimir303]

the nail in Obama's coffin was Palin. It's clear.

It's over.

I'm willing to bet all my points on a MCCAIN victory.

She does nothing for McCain. All you have to do is point out that McCain picked a unexperienced female VP, not because she would be a good VP but because he thinks that Hillary supporters are dumb enough to vote for him because of her.


In fact, everybody is critisizing his VP pick.....so I don't know what you're talking about.

Obama still is the favorite because he has REGISTERED MORE DEMOCRATIC VOTERS who will turn up on November 4th. The registered voters are all that matters.

[Scott9945]

You're really wasting your time with this thread, because the site consists of mainly liberals; which doesn't suprise me since Boxing is more cultured with hispanics and blacks, also mostly liberals by and large demographically. No Republican would ever change their mind, heh. Trust me. But, it's different with Democrats because those voters have more potential to switch over and vote McCain, just because of Palin. Palin is way hotter than Hillary as well, and that may win over many lesbian Democrat voters.

The truth is, by and large, more democrats will switch to McCain because of there being an extremely fresh, quality VP in Palin. But even if she were less qualified, the fact that she'd be breaking a huge glass ceiling is what many of the Democratic females would switch for, regardless of her views on abortion. You have to understand that they know you gotta break eggs to have an omelet, breaking the glass ceiling is what is most important to feminists...that comes before everything. Now, if you really think that the chance of Republicans voting for Obama because he picked a white VP are going to be anywhere near the number of Democrats voting McCain because he picked a woman VP, you simply are delusinonal. Gender is more powerful than race.

That sounds like a whole lotta wishful thinking. Lesbian Democrat voters voting for Palin because of her looks? In your dreams.

[Dr.Depravity]

There is no comparison to the American quality of life between the pre Reagan and post Reagan administration. Smart liberals know not to bring that up. He "ended the cold war without firing a shot." And reinstalled pride in being American.
About Palin, Democrats are going to shoot themselves in the foot if they go after her. She has more experience than Obama, and is a proven reformer. Biden is a life long politician. So I think its going to be harder to sell the "change" message from now on.

[Don Corleone]

She does nothing for McCain. All you have to do is point out that McCain picked a unexperienced female VP, not because she would be a good VP but because he thinks that Hillary supporters are dumb enough to vote for him because of her.


In fact, everybody is critisizing his VP pick.....so I don't know what you're talking about.

Obama still is the favorite because he has REGISTERED MORE DEMOCRATIC VOTERS who will turn up on November 4th. The registered voters are all that matters.

I think all this should be re-edited. She does much for McCain or else she wouldn't be in that position. Not only is she brining in women voters, she is also bringing in a sort of change that fits nicely with McCain's experience being a women on the ticket. I think more critisism would come if McCain were to pick an old running mate like himself because many people wouldn't be able to connect but with her, but Governor Palin sort of balances out the ticket and brings in voters that otherwise McCain wouldn't be able to bring in with what she brings to the table. And with her as his running mate, she brings the change (although not viewed like Obama's) that McCain has been bashed about by liberals.

And if by "everybody" you mean media then it's hard to take your advice on this issue. The media IMO are easily more bias towards Obama then they have been for McCain, but for some good reasons. Obama is the first african-american who has won a party's nomination, he is appealing to young voters, and brings in "hope" and "change", which some are awaiting after eight years of the Bush administration's failed policies. The media will always jump on the oportunity of downplaying a ticket with a female on it, especially since many were anticipating an Obama-Clinton ticket but were left disappointed. So I think to accept the media's attention on Palin shouldn't sit well with people because there are many things that not much people know about her yet and are going to find out soon, so you shouldn't jump the gun too early based on what you hear from media correspondents...

[Scott9945]

There is no comparison to the American quality of life between the pre Reagan and post Reagan administration. Smart liberals know not to bring that up. He "ended the cold war without firing a shot." And reinstalled pride in being American.
About Palin, Democrats are going to shoot themselves in the foot if they go after her. She has more experience than Obama, and is a proven reformer. Biden is a life long politician. So I think its going to be harder to sell the "change" message from now on.

She has more experience than Obama at what? Nothing meaninful. Like Bill Maher said, when she gets a call at 3 AM it's because a moose has gotten into some garbage cans. She is strictly small time and will be exposed as a folly of the doddering old McCain.

[Sin City]

There is no comparison to the American quality of life between the pre Reagan and post Reagan administration. Smart liberals know not to bring that up. He "ended the cold war without firing a shot." And reinstalled pride in being American.
About Palin, Democrats are going to shoot themselves in the foot if they go after her. She has more experience than Obama, and is a proven reformer. Biden is a life long politician. So I think its going to be harder to sell the "change" message from now on.

Reagan didn't end the Soviet Union.. it ended itself. He was just lucky to be in office when it happened, sorry...

[!! Shawn]

First their so called "greatest" Republican president Ronald Reagan wasn't as great as they make him out to be:



http://www.cedarcomm.com/~stevelm1/usdebt.htm

As President Reagan entered office in 1981 he repeatedly called for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, yet never submitted a balanced budget himself.

Many on the right reflexively blame the Democratically controlled Congress for the “big spending” during his administration, even though Republicans controlled the Senate for the first six years of his two terms.

Only during the last two years of the Reagan administr- ation was the Congress completely controlled by Demo- crats, and the records show that the growth of the debt slowed during this period.

It appears that the frequently referenced Reagan’s Conservative mythology is contrary to the truth, he was an award winning, record setting liberal spender.

The fact is that Reagan was able to push his tax cuts through both Houses of Congress, but he never pushed through any reduced spending programs. His weak leadership in this area makes him directly responsible for the unprecedented rise in borrowing during his time in office, an average of 13.8% per year.

The increase in total debt during Reagan’s two terms was larger than all the debt accumulated by all the presidents before him combined. From 1983 through 1985, with a Republican Senate, the debt was increasing at over 17% per year. While Mr. Reagan was in office this nation’s debt went from just under 1 trillion dollars to over 2.6 trillion dollars, a 200% increase. T

The sad part about this increase is that it was not to educate our children, or to improve our infrastructure, or to help the poor, or even to finance a war. Reagan’s enormous increase in the national debt was not to pay for any noble cause at all; his primary unapologetic goal was to pad the pockets of the rich.

The huge national debt we have today is a living legacy to his failed Neo-Conservative economic policies. Reagan’s legacy is a heavy financial weight that continues to apply an unrelenting drag on this nation’s economic resources.

Please do your research.

When Reagan entered office the United States inflation rate stood at 11.83%[83] and unemployment at 7.5%.[84] Reagan implemented policies based on supply-side economics and advocated a laissez-faire philosophy,[85] seeking to stimulate the economy with large, across-the-board tax cuts.[86][87] Citing the economic theories of Arthur Laffer, Reagan promoted the proposed tax cuts as potentially stimulating the economy enough to expand the tax base, offsetting the revenue loss due to reduced rates of taxation, a theory that entered political discussion as the Laffer curve. Reaganomics was the subject of debate with supporters pointing to improvements in certain key economic indicators as evidence of success, and critics pointing to large increases in federal budget deficits and the national debt. His policy of "peace through strength" (also described as "firm but fair") resulted in a record peacetime defense buildup including a 40% real increase in defense spending between 1981 and 1985.[88]

During Reagan's presidency federal income tax rates were lowered significantly with the signing of the bipartisan Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981.[89] Real gross domestic product (GDP) growth recovered strongly after the 1982 recession and grew during his eight years in office at an annual rate of 3.4% per year.[90] Unemployment peaked at 10.8% percent in December 1982—higher than any time since the Great Depression then dropped during the rest of Reagan's presidency.[87] Sixteen million new jobs were created, while inflation significantly decreased.[91] The net effect of all Reagan-era tax bills was a 1% decrease in government revenues.[92] Reagan also revised the tax code with the bipartisan Tax Reform Act of 1986.[93]

Reagan took a horribly failing economy handed down to him by Jimmy Carter and created a prosperous country in a short amount of time.

[!! Shawn]

Reagan didn't end the Soviet Union.. it ended itself. He was just lucky to be in office when it happened, sorry...

That is wrong. Reagan is responsible in large part for the downfall of the Soviet Union.

[Sin City]

That is wrong. Reagan is responsible in large part for the downfall of the Soviet Union.

sure he is..
anyway, face it you fascist war pigs.. America doesn't want 4 more years of the same ****.
It's in the bag for the Dems. Wake up and stop being in denial!