- Joined
- Dec 5, 2005
re: the obama/mccain coverage, even beyond the fact that not a single person has explained or defined what makes an article "negative", there's a big difference in how they campaigned.
Obama campaigned in specifics about issues, legislation and made very specific promises and outlined his political platform.
McCain and Palin campaigned on a platform of negativity and fear.
Clearly when you let loose with quotes like "Obama is palling around with terrorists" or you can't coherently answer a single interview question from Katie Couric, or you can't name a single magazine or newspaper you read, or that you have foreign policy experience because Putin might fly over Alaska to come to the US, or you repeatedly blunder and misstate facts, or you repeatedly question someone's religion and patriotism or claim the Vice President is in charge of the Senate, or that death panels are going to be created you are going to attract far more negative articles than candidates who shockingly actually stick to political issues and rise above mud slinging character attack politics, (ie, the Karl Rove campaign special). If anything, Palin received far less proportionate articles for the sheer amount of hyperbolic drivel and baseless, disprovable character attacks that came out of her mouth during that particular election cycle.
There's a reason why the rating of negative opinion of Palin was at an all time high during the 2008 election cycle, and why she has a higher negative rating still than nearly every member of congress including polarizing politicians such as Nancy Pelosi and Michelle Bachman. I mean she just had a speaking engagement benefitting military families cancelled because there was an overwhelmingly negative response.
Let's be honest, 2008 had little to do with John McCain. It mostly dealt with the failed presidency of George W. Bush, the optimism offered by Obama, and the cynical nomination of Palin for VP by a desperate GOP who assumed they had no other shot of winning, as well as the subsequent revelation that she was completely unprepared to hold any kind of political office. McCain and Biden were barely even persons of interest during the election cycle.
I really hope she is the nominee in 2012, she is pretty much the only person the GOP could nominate that Obama has 0% chance of losing to, especially with her violence-encouraging comments (Beck too) that ended in the Gabrielle Giffords debacle.
Obama campaigned in specifics about issues, legislation and made very specific promises and outlined his political platform.
McCain and Palin campaigned on a platform of negativity and fear.
Clearly when you let loose with quotes like "Obama is palling around with terrorists" or you can't coherently answer a single interview question from Katie Couric, or you can't name a single magazine or newspaper you read, or that you have foreign policy experience because Putin might fly over Alaska to come to the US, or you repeatedly blunder and misstate facts, or you repeatedly question someone's religion and patriotism or claim the Vice President is in charge of the Senate, or that death panels are going to be created you are going to attract far more negative articles than candidates who shockingly actually stick to political issues and rise above mud slinging character attack politics, (ie, the Karl Rove campaign special). If anything, Palin received far less proportionate articles for the sheer amount of hyperbolic drivel and baseless, disprovable character attacks that came out of her mouth during that particular election cycle.
There's a reason why the rating of negative opinion of Palin was at an all time high during the 2008 election cycle, and why she has a higher negative rating still than nearly every member of congress including polarizing politicians such as Nancy Pelosi and Michelle Bachman. I mean she just had a speaking engagement benefitting military families cancelled because there was an overwhelmingly negative response.
Let's be honest, 2008 had little to do with John McCain. It mostly dealt with the failed presidency of George W. Bush, the optimism offered by Obama, and the cynical nomination of Palin for VP by a desperate GOP who assumed they had no other shot of winning, as well as the subsequent revelation that she was completely unprepared to hold any kind of political office. McCain and Biden were barely even persons of interest during the election cycle.
I really hope she is the nominee in 2012, she is pretty much the only person the GOP could nominate that Obama has 0% chance of losing to, especially with her violence-encouraging comments (Beck too) that ended in the Gabrielle Giffords debacle.
It's amazing, really, how 2 intelligent, thoughtful people can see reality in completely opposite views. Political forums would suck if everyone believed the same thing.
, to each their own my friend is all I can say
