Im not arguing with you, but, it didnt hurt Obama when it was brought up, that he was tied to Rev. Wright's church.gut;855036 wrote:Because he's a politician, not a preacher, and most people don't want to mix the two. MSM will have a field day spinning him as some radical religious nut.
I'm also a bit offended he pulled this stunt clearly for political gain.
QuakerOats;855065 wrote:Because the solution to all our problems is more government, not prayer.
Wait, wat? A politician did something for political gain? The hell you say!gut;855036 wrote:Because he's a politician, not a preacher, and most people don't want to mix the two. MSM will have a field day spinning him as some radical religious nut.
I'm also a bit offended he pulled this stunt clearly for political gain.
gut;855036 wrote:Because he's a politician, not a preacher, and most people don't want to mix the two.
True. But they will spin Perry as some sort of right wing, states rights, secessionist loon anyway. Religion will just be a part of it.gut;855036 wrote:MSM will have a field day spinning him as some radical religious nut.
gut;855036 wrote:I'm also a bit offended he pulled this stunt clearly for political gain.
Let me get this straight: the MSM and talking heads and Democrat opponents are going to do everything they can to portray Perry as a religious nut, yet he's stupid enough to think he can gain politically from organizing a prayer event? He either did the event with honest good intentions, or he's really really stupid.gut;855036 wrote:Because he's a politician, not a preacher, and most people don't want to mix the two. MSM will have a field day spinning him as some radical religious nut.
I'm also a bit offended he pulled this stunt clearly for political gain.
To be fair I think it's fucking insulting that any candidate thinks I give a fuck that they are or are not religious. Democrat or Republican.majorspark;855138 wrote:Democrat candidates for president practically fall all over themselves to get behind a church pulpit while on the campaign trail. Not too many seem bothered by the mix.
True. But they will spin Perry as some sort of right wing, states rights, secessionist loon anyway. Religion will just be a part of it.
The event in an of itself does not bother me. Nor does it bother me that a political figure organizes such an event. If its motivation is primarily for political gain I'd be a bit offended as well.
At least that's what the professional and objective journalists in our MSM would have us believe.QuakerOats;855065 wrote:Because the solution to all our problems is more government, not prayer.
majorspark;855138 wrote:Democrat candidates for president practically fall all over themselves to get behind a church pulpit while on the campaign trail. Not too many seem bothered by the mix.
It's one thing for a bunch of OC armchair political hacks to make posts criticizing it. It's a whole different issue when America's allegedly objective 4th Estate with a responsibility to fairly inform the public at-large is clearly biased favorably towards one political party.I Wear Pants;855300 wrote:Oh please, you guys make fun of/criticize when Dems do it and Dems do the same to Republicans.
Since when are a bunch of corporations given some sort of moral responsibility?believer;855304 wrote:It's one thing for a bunch of OC armchair political hacks to make posts criticizing it. It's a whole different issue when America's allegedly objective 4th Estate with a responsibility to fairly inform the public at-large is clearly biased favorably towards one political party.
If that's the case then the morons are going after the wrong market.I Wear Pants;855312 wrote:Since when are a bunch of corporations given some sort of moral responsibility?
If you're a free market guy which I think you are you should realize that the news corporations have no motivation other than profit for stakeholders. At all.
How so?believer;855317 wrote:If that's the case then the morons are going after the wrong market.
I only make fun/critisize when the candidate does something that makes fools out of themselves. Like mentioned above Hillary's attempt at a southern african american accent. A lame attempt to show she was one of them. The audience ate it up. The only thing funnier would be to see George W. Bush in a similar situation try to mimic a such an accent. The room would instantly fall silent. You could hear a pin drop.I Wear Pants;855300 wrote:Oh please, you guys make fun of/criticize when Dems do it and Dems do the same to Republicans.
I Wear Pants;855312 wrote:Since when are a bunch of corporations given some sort of moral responsibility?
If you're a free market guy which I think you are you should realize that the news corporations have no motivation other than profit for stakeholders. At all.
Which is probably because a lot of them start out as writers or journalists I would assume, who tend to be more left on the political spectrum as do most creative individuals (musicians, artists, actors, etc).Writerbuckeye;855376 wrote:You'd have a valid point if the people in the board rooms were making the day to day editorial decisions on what to cover, how to cover it (from what angle), etc.
They don't. They don't get involved at all, for the most part.
That's left to editors and assignment editors (TV). Those are some of the most powerful folks in media. They can make or break you by deciding what to put on the front page, how big the type is going to be, and what is said. Same for assignment editors deciding which stories get aired, what order they go in, how much times is devoted to it, and the rest.
Mix in the reporters, more than 90 percent of whom have the same political leanings as their bosses (the editors) and that is where the bias comes from -- not the corporations, which only care about what's aired IF it affects the bottom line. And it almost never does, one way or the other.
majorspark;855370 wrote:I only make fun/critisize when the candidate does something that makes fools out of themselves. Like mentioned above Hillary's attempt at a southern african american accent. A lame attempt to show she was one of them. The audience ate it up. The only thing funnier would be to see George W. Bush in a similar situation try to mimic a such an accent. The room would instantly fall silent. You could hear a pin drop.
Manhattan Buckeye;856777 wrote:Obama has as much chance of winning Virginia right now as I have a chance winning a Mr. Universe competition. He won in '08 due to record turnout in the urban areas, and that demographic has suffered as much in his term as anyone. They might not vote GOP, but they won't turn out and vote for him like they did previously.
I also don't know how it is a given he wins Florida, the RE market there is beyond terrible.
Obama is still considered the favorite....but I think he has very little chance of being re-elected. I thought he would go down in history as the worst president in history...and that prediction was made the day he took office.Ty Webb;856765 wrote:http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html
This is how RCP sees the EC right now
This is how I see the race shaking out with the remaining toss ups:
President Obama wins:
Colorado
Iowa
Michigan
Minnesota
New Hampshire
Florida
Wisconsin
For a total of 281 EC votes
I see the only real toss-ups on Election Day being PA, Virginia and Ohio
Even if the President loses PA, Virginia and Ohio he still wins the Election by a margin of 281-254
I think he ends up winning PA to win by a margin of 299-236