Amerikaanse Presidentsverkiezingen #37

quote:

In the new poll, taken Friday through Sunday, McCain leads Obama by 54%-44% among those seen as most likely to vote. The survey of 1,022 adults, including 959 registered voters, has a margin of error of +/— 3 points for both samples.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:29 schreef Apache4U het volgende:
Die man, staat nu dus voor in de peilingen... Tel daarbij op dat, hoe naar het ook klinkt, zijn tegenstander een donkerer kleurtje heeft ,

quote:

en dat de partij waar deze man lid van is bekend staat om het aggressieve , negatieve campagne voeren.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:29 schreef Apache4U het volgende:
McCain gaat dus winnen

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 01:31 schreef Perico het volgende:

[..]

Er deden 3 Clintons mee... Bill en Chelsea hebben beiden in meer dan 40 staten ook rallies gehouden, in eenzelfde strak schema als Hillary. Bill had een keer 13 rallies in 72 uur bijvoorbeeld, om aan te geven dat ze echt niet voor spek en bonen meededen.

En ze hebben eigenlijk alleen maar de wind van voren gehad, vooral op MSNBC en CNN, terwijl Obama helemaal nooit een kritische vraag kreeg, op de Rev. Wright periode na. Toen hij in het tweede deel van de primaries veel staten ging verliezen, praatte men het altijd goed, a la: "De Clintons zijn bekend en doen gemeen tegen Obama, en Obama kent men niet goed, daarom heeft hij deze staat verloren".

Je zag dat na de eerste voorzichtige kritiek de race ook in evenwicht was, maar hij had toen zijn voorsprong al gepakt.

quote:

Je kunt er donder op zeggen, dat mocht Obama nipt verliezen, dat men dat weer uit de kast haalt:
"McCain kent men al 30 jaar en Obama is een nieuwe naam, tsjah, de mensen kennen hem nog niet zo goed"...

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:40 schreef SuikerVuist het volgende:

[..]


[..]

Inderdaad.
[..]

Mocht Obama verliezen (en dat verwacht ik niet) dan zullen de Clintons de schuld krijgen. Het is hoe dan ook nu of nooit voor Barack. Michelle heeft geen trek in een tweede poging, heeft ze al eerder aangegeven.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:39 schreef JohnDope het volgende:

[..]

Met dat gepraat over dat kleurtje (te blank of te zwart) van Obama kan je nu niet meer mee aan komen zetten. Dat is een afgesloten hoofdstuk.
[..]

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:47 schreef Apache4U het volgende:

[..]

Ik denk dat dat bij een percentage Amerikanen van invloed is zodra ze in dat stemhokje staan.
Als jij denkt van niet, prima.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:49 schreef ilona-scuderia het volgende:
Wat zijn ze relaxt hè die Michael Moore & Larry King...

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:50 schreef JohnDope het volgende:

[..]

Relaxt in wat voor zin?

Boze tongen beweren overigens dat Moore een marionet van de Bush administration is....

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:54 schreef ilona-scuderia het volgende:

[..]

Michael Moore is voor Obama, net als Larry King, CNN, Fox & bijna alle media...

Alex Jones - Michael Moore is a Fraud

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:57 schreef JohnDope het volgende:

[..]

Hier een analyse over hoe Moore de straat van Bush probeert schoon te vegen.

Alex Jones - Michael Moore is a Fraud

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 13:06 schreef ilona-scuderia het volgende:
En dan nog iets; 'niets is wat het lijkt'...

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 10:48 schreef JohnDope het volgende:

Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:54 schreef ilona-scuderia het volgende:

[..]

Michael Moore is voor Obama, net als Larry King, CNN, Fox & bijna alle media...

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:54 schreef ilona-scuderia het volgende:
Michael Moore is voor Obama, net als Larry King, CNN, Fox & bijna alle media...

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:12 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 10:51 schreef Caesu het volgende:

[..]

http://www.usatoday.com/n(...)008-09-07-poll_N.htm

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 11:57 schreef JohnDope het volgende:

[..]

Hier een analyse over hoe Moore de straat van Bush probeert schoon te vegen.

Alex Jones - Michael Moore is a Fraud

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 14:12 schreef Toad het volgende:
Ze hebben het interview met Obama uitgesmeerd over de komende drie dagen! Allemaal gratis promotie voor hem.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 14:26 schreef Montov het volgende:
Met 5% meer Democraten als Republikeinen hoeft Obama eigenlijk alleen maar voor opkomst te zorgen onder zijn aanhang.

quote:

Rick Davis, campaign manager for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., just told Fox News Channel's Chris Wallace that McCain running mate Gov. Sarah Palin won't subject herself to any tough questions from reporters "until the point in time when she'll be treated with respect and deference."

Davis assailed the way the media had discussed Palin and her family in the last week and said the campaign would wait until a less hostile media environment.

So when will she subject herself to questions?

"When we think it's time and when she feels comfortable doing it," Davis said, praising a Fox News Channel profile of Palin that ran last night.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 14:26 schreef Montov het volgende:

Oftewel groundgame waar Obama het van moet hebben. Met 5% meer Democraten als Republikeinen hoeft Obama eigenlijk alleen maar voor opkomst te zorgen onder zijn aanhang.

quote:

Democrats must learn some respect

By Clive Crook

Published: September 7 2008 19:03 | Last updated: September 7 2008 19:03



This article is not the first to note the cultural contradiction in American liberalism, but just now the point bears restating. The election may turn on it.

Democrats speak up for the less prosperous; they have well-intentioned policies to help them; they are disturbed by inequality, and want to do something about it. Their concern is real and admirable. The trouble is, they lack respect for the objects of their solicitude. Their sympathy comes mixed with disdain, and even contempt.

Democrats regard their policies as self-evidently in the interests of the US working and middle classes. Yet those wide segments of US society keep helping to elect Republican presidents. How is one to account for this? Are those people idiots? Frankly, yes – or so many liberals are driven to conclude. Either that or bigots, clinging to guns, God and white supremacy; or else pathetic dupes, ever at the disposal of Republican strategists. If they only had the brains to vote in their interests, Democrats think, the party would never be out of power. But again and again, the Republicans tell their lies, and those stupid damned voters buy it.

It is an attitude that a good part of the US media share. The country has conservative media (Fox News, talk radio) as well as liberal media (most of the rest). Curiously, whereas the conservative media know they are conservative, much of the liberal media believe themselves to be neutral.

Their constant support for Democratic views has nothing to do with bias, in their minds, but reflects the fact that Democrats just happen to be right about everything. The result is the same: for much of the media, the fact that Republicans keep winning can only be due to the backwardness of much of the country.

Because it was so unexpected, Sarah Palin’s nomination for the vice-presidency jolted these attitudes to the surface. Ms Palin is a small-town American. It is said that she has only recently acquired a passport. Her husband is a fisherman and production worker. She represents a great slice of the country that the Democrats say they care about – yet her selection induced an apoplectic fit.

For days, the derision poured down from Democratic party talking heads and much of the media too. The idea that “this woman” might be vice-president or even president was literally incomprehensible. The popular liberal comedian Bill Maher, whose act is an endless sneer at the Republican party, noted that John McCain’s case for the presidency was that only he was capable of standing between the US and its enemies, but that should he die he had chosen “this stewardess” to take over. This joke was not – or not only – a complaint about lack of experience. It was also an expression of class disgust. I give Mr Maher credit for daring to say what many Democrats would only insinuate.

Little was known about Ms Palin, but it sufficed for her nomination to be regarded as a kind of insult. Even after her triumph at the Republican convention in St Paul last week, the put-downs continued. Yes, the delivery was all right, but the speech was written by somebody else – as though that is unusual, as though the speechwriter is not the junior partner in the preparation of a speech, and as though just anybody could have raised the roof with that text. Voters in small towns and suburbs, forever mocked and condescended to by metropolitan liberals, are attuned to this disdain. Every four years, many take their revenge.

The irony in 2008 is that the Democratic candidate, despite Republican claims to the contrary, is not an elitist. Barack Obama is an intellectual, but he remembers his history. He can and does connect with ordinary people. His courteous reaction to the Palin nomination was telling. Mrs Palin (and others) found it irresistible to skewer him in St Paul for “saying one thing about [working Americans] in Scranton, and another in San Francisco”. Mr Obama made a bad mistake when he talked about clinging to God and guns, but I am inclined to make allowances: he was speaking to his own political tribe in the native idiom.

The problem in my view is less Mr Obama and more the attitudes of the claque of official and unofficial supporters that surrounds him. The prevailing liberal mindset is what makes the criticisms of Mr Obama’s distance from working Americans stick.

If only the Democrats could contain their sense of entitlement to govern in a rational world, and their consequent distaste for wide swathes of the US electorate, they might gain the unshakeable grip on power they feel they deserve. Winning elections would certainly be easier – and Republicans would have to address themselves more seriously to economic insecurity. But the fathomless cultural complacency of the metropolitan liberal rules this out.

The attitude that expressed itself in response to the Palin nomination is the best weapon in the Republican armoury. Rely on the Democrats to keep it primed. You just have to laugh.

The Palin nomination could still misfire for Mr McCain, but the liberal reaction has made it a huge success so far. To avoid endlessly repeating this mistake, Democrats need to learn some respect.

It will be hard. They will have to develop some regard for the values that the middle of the country expresses when it votes Republican. Religion. Unembarrassed flag-waving patriotism. Freedom to succeed or fail through one’s own efforts. Refusal to be pitied, bossed around or talked down to. And all those other laughable redneck notions that made the United States what it is.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 14:24 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

Heel interessant filmpje, maar het zegt niets over Moore als puppet van Bush or something.

quote:

Het is niet de taak van Moore om 100% de waarheid te achterhalen. Moore is gewoon een slechtere onderzoeker dan Jones wat dat betreft. Moore lijkt zijn huiswerk gewoon niet goed gedaan te hebben,

quote:

maar of hij dat expres doet is maar de vraag.

quote:

The country has conservative media (Fox News, talk radio) as well as liberal media (most of the rest).

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 14:36 schreef Boze_Appel het volgende:

[..]

De gemiddelde opkomst is overigens vrij laag vind ik. Zeker hoe erg het schijnt te leven. Blijkbaar valt dat dus toch erg tegen en gaat net wat meer dan de helft van de stemgerechtigden stemmen.

quote:

But more intriguing than any email correspondence contained in the four boxes was what was not released: about 1100 emails. Palin's office provided McLeod with a 78-page list (PDF) cataloging the emails it was withholding. Many of them had been written by Palin or sent to her. Palin's office claimed most of the undisclosed emails were exempt from release because they were covered by the "executive" or "deliberative process" privileges that protect communications between Palin and her aides about policy matters. But the subject lines of some of the withheld emails suggest they were not related to policy matters. Several refer to one of Palin's political foes, others to a well-known Alaskan journalist. Moreover, some of the withhold emails were CC'ed to Todd Palin, the governor's husband. Todd Palin—a.k.a. the First Dude—holds no official state position (though he has been a close and influential adviser for Governor Palin). The fact that Palin and her aides shared these emails with a citizen outside the government undercuts the claim that they must be protected under executive privilege. McLeod asks, "What is Sarah Palin hiding?"

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 15:02 schreef pberends het volgende:
Normaliter stemmen er iets van 100 miljoen Amerikanen. Nu was dat in 2004 opeens 120 miljoen, dus er zit een erg stijgende lijn in.

Met Obama en Palin gaan er denk ik nog veel meer mensen naar de stembus. Ik schat zo'n 145 miljoen. Das helemaal niet slecht voor 230 miljoen kiesgerechtigden.

quote:

Op maandag 8 september 2008 14:54 schreef Monidique het volgende:

[..]

.