|
honestly?
The RNC? If republicans get a significant bump out of it I will be extremely surprised. RNC doesnt have steven spielberg and tom hanks and stevie wonder, it doesnt have the amazing direction and staging and intricracies. It doesnt have the media attention.
RNC will be nowhere near as big as this
|
Well right now it's in the Republicans court, with the RNC coming up and McCain and his VP will be seen tomorrow and the polls could go either way I think with his pick. If it's a woman I could see trouble, and McCain isn't dumb when it comes to picking Liberman.
|
United States22883 Posts
HOLY SHIT BET HAS CONVENTION COVERAGE. Something tells me this is going to be the best of the best.
|
McCain is running a congratulatory commercial.
|
United States22883 Posts
All I see are $1.49 Delta Minis from Popeye's. Thank you BET, my new place for politics!
|
On August 29 2008 12:33 Mindcrime wrote:McCain is running a congratulatory commercial. 
I missed it
on what channel?
|
|
On August 29 2008 12:33 Mindcrime wrote:McCain is running a congratulatory commercial. 
It will be gone tomorrow.
|
Congratulations Ad
There is no attack in this ad just McCain saying congratulations and notes that the 28th is a historic day (1963).
|
John McCain's campaign isn't going to leak the name of its vp pick tonight as they originally intended "out of respect for Obama."
how big of them
|
Meh, I was disappointed in Obama's speech.
While I think he needs to attack more, I thought that that speech was the wrong venue. You're accepting the nomination here, be positive. The day should be about Obama, not a contrast with McCain.
Oh well.
|
United States22883 Posts
On August 29 2008 12:57 triangle wrote: Meh, I was disappointed in Obama's speech.
While I think he needs to attack more, I thought that that speech was the wrong venue. You're accepting the nomination here, be positive. The day should be about Obama, not a contrast with McCain.
Oh well. This highlights the problem he's been facing the past two weeks. Is it actually possible for him to win running with Hope and Change, or does he need to stray closer to the typical route? I'm not sure, but with regret I think I'm leaning in the direction that Change isn't enough.
|
On August 29 2008 12:33 Mindcrime wrote:McCain is running a congratulatory commercial.  I think this is significant. it could mean McCain can take away the title of 'reform' politician. if he keeps up with this kind of message (which he probably won't), it could mean undermining Obama's message of "change" and "reform". essentially, he'll be stealing the moral high ground. Further, it's an appeal to POed hillary supporters who are looking for any excuse to vote against Obama. It makes McCain an 'acceptable' alternative.
This message is a calculated move. If McCain earnestly wanted to express his congratulations, he could've called up Obama privately. Instead, he spent a few million airing this ad. As far as politics goes, these kinds of messages have a powerful emotional effect, in that it reveals the candidates' humanity. For another such move that turned the tides of an election, see Hillary & New Hampshire. You can bet this will be talked about on blogs and opinion pages all over. In that spirit, I expect Obama to air a similar ad on the day of McCain's nomination.
Cynicism aside, this commercial gave me a great feeling of relief. And to be honest, it made it a little more likely I'll vote for McCain.
On August 29 2008 12:57 triangle wrote: Meh, I was disappointed in Obama's speech.
While I think he needs to attack more, I thought that that speech was the wrong venue. You're accepting the nomination here, be positive. The day should be about Obama, not a contrast with McCain.
Oh well. Maybe, but there will never be another chance for Obama to reach as many people in as little time. It's a matter of cost efficiency.
|
the AP under Ron Fournier is sure losing whatever image of impartiality it once had
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CVN_CONVENTION_ANALYSIS
it's sad to see AP abdicating it's role as a source of independent journalism
Edit: i've noticed a consistent slant in AP's reporting of late, but maybe i'm alone in this. what do you guys think?
|
Shoot, I'm an Obama guy myself, and I'm noticing all kinds of slant in the articles I'm reading. Practically everything about the convention on nytimes.com is, in one way or another, lining up to fellate Barack. I totally get what you're saying, a-game.
|
well i was actually suggesting that AP under Ron Fournier has a decidedly pro-mccain slant.
not that there's anything new or significant about biased reporting, but i've always found AP articles up until this election to be pretty neutral.
Edit: i don't want AP to fellate obama either though, if i want to see biased coverage i go to places like kos.dailykos.com. i just wish AP had stuck to being objective and neutral.
|
On August 29 2008 14:39 a-game wrote:the AP under Ron Fournier is sure losing whatever image of impartiality it once had http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/C/CVN_CONVENTION_ANALYSISit's sad to see AP abdicating it's role as a source of independent journalism Edit: i've noticed a consistent slant in AP's reporting of late, but maybe i'm alone in this. what do you guys think?
that link doesnt work for me
And yeah I have seen ridiculous pro-mccain AP stories.
NYTimes is pro-obama, but thats to be expected
|
here's the same article with a different url http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080829/D92RNBIG0.html
and i agree, the difference between AP and NYT is that everyone's known for a while that NYT is left-leaning. whereas, for me anyways, the AP had the reputation of a fairly neutral news source.
|
quite honestly its bullshit
first they have murdoch+fox+all the newspapers/tv stations he controls, and now AP.
I dont even know what to say
|
On August 29 2008 15:22 a-game wrote:here's the same article with a different url http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080829/D92RNBIG0.htmland i agree, the difference between AP and NYT is that everyone's known for a while that NYT is left-leaning. whereas, for me anyways, the AP had the reputation of a fairly neutral news source.
I didn't feel any bias, except maybe at this part:
For instance, Obama said it's time "to protect Social Security for future generations." But he didn't mention his main proposal, which is to add a new Social Security payroll tax to incomes above $250,000 a year.
He said he would "cut taxes for 95 percent of all working families," but did not say how.
|
|
|
|