This blog is a place for us to give our Analysis and Opinions on important topics related to civics, government and politics.
Analysis is a clinical interpretation of items, issues, ideas, or events and an explanation of their impact on the future (i.e. something you think is going to happen).
Opinion is composed of your reactions, feelings, and beliefs on items, issues, ideas or events (i.e. something you would like to happen). Even though they are your opinions, they should be based in fact.
Thursday, February 21, 2008
Analysis: Did any candidate benefit from the 2-21-08 Democratic debate?
How did Sen. Clinton, Obama, or McCain gain ground because of this debate?
I think that they both did very well. However, it was quite obvious that Clinton was trying to get a rise out of Obama and maybe cause him to break his character, which I think he almost did, but didn't, and did a good job of not bringing up the plagiarism issue up when he had the chance to speak (me personally, would've smacked her).
Clinton was doing a good job of spinning things her way, such as saying Obama's health care plan leaves 15 million people not covered, which as he said is false. One good moment for her was the ending where she made a rather good conclusion to the debate.
I personally think that two defining moments for Obama are: 1-when he talked about how the people know what and who they are voting for. 2-when he said that Clinton is implying that the president sitting down in diplomatic relations is a privilege for countries to earn only perpetuates the arrogance and stupidity of the Bush administration's foreign policy. We have to fix the world's opinion of us, and we wont do that by pretending we are better than everyone else.
Overall, I think although at some points Obama was not as articulate and to the point as Clinton was, he came out on top b/c he was able to point out the subtle similarities between Clinton and Bush. It suggests that Clinton will be another Bush, only on the other side of the political spectrum.
Clinton was clearly trying to connect with the voters like she was able to do way back in New Hampshire. She talked about living there, shared values, Texans Barbara Jordan and Ann Richards (I loved Ann Richards).
Obama didn't fumble, didn't stumble. He did all he had to do: not mess up. Yet I think he did more. He talked substantively about Cuba, the economy, the fence, and others. I thought he hit the ball out of the park when asked about talk vs. action. I think that was a defining moment. My notes just said, "wow".
On plagiarism: "It's not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox." That Clinton line got booed. While that was significant, I thought it was even more significant that even if the line worked, how much more can she indicate she's from 'the past' than to say Xerox? People in 2008 make photocopies. Does Xerox even make copiers any more?
Finally, for the first time I noticed that Clinton talked at least twice about: as president I "would" instead of her usual I "will". In addition to that, the beginning of her final statement sounded like the beginning of her concession speech. Afterward they called it "valedictory" on CNN. It sounded like she knew it was winding down or it was already over.
It seems like the Mandy Grunewald wing of the Clinton campaign has won and they are not going negative face-to-face. Either finding her voice, or preparing for 2012. You decide.
p.s. Either way, these are both really, really smart, prepared, professional individuals. All of the candidates who are left are really impressive Americans. Like Michelle Obama, I'm proud. I hope the musical went well.
p.s. Where was the question about John McCain and interesting relationships with lobbyists?
I like how the crowd booed Hillary for the "change you can xerox" line. I also hate hate HATE how she said (and I'm paraphrasing here)'I think everyone here knows I've been through hardships.' Is that supposed to be a good thing? Am I supposed to be proud of you for surviving through that? For someone who is so concerned about women's rights, she wasn't even capable of standing up for herself and leaving her husband when she should have. For this reason alone I have a hard time respecting her.
The Democratic debate was really good in my opinion. It seemed to me that Clinton was taking stabs at Obama all night. She was also very personable when it came just to her talking. I thought that Obama answered the questions better like on immigration.
Overall. Good democratic debate. Obama will still come out on top.
I think that debate slightly helped Obama because he didn't try to attack Hillary. The debate also didn't hinder Clinton that night or Friday, but now I think it hurt her because of the sudden very negative campaign she's started to launch. This shows her two-sidedness. She now wants another debate. This would be, if I'm correct, the 20th debate, and if Obama agrees, she'll definitely be more negative in that debate. McCain wasn't affected at all by the debate, in my opinion. In fact, he's been doing quite well after the NY Times article because the Republican party became united after a liberal NY Times attack. So the NY Times helped McCain more than hurt him. Besides the conservatives rallying up, Obama's latest setback is Nader's announcement to run for president.
The debate was kind of bore. I thought Senator Clinton's answer to the last question, was amazing. The debate, I think, didn't help Clinton, at all, or Obama.
On Vlad's points: 1. Tuesday will be the 20th Dem. debate. It is already scheduled and has been for several weeks. Calling for something to happen that is already scheduled is a little odd. 2. The NY Times is considered a liberal newspaper. At the same time, consider this: a. they have endorsed McCain. b. they wrote investigative articles in the 90's about former President Clinton and a relationship he had with some intern. 3. Limbaugh is finally rallying around McCain while reminding him that these liberals are all "snakes" and they are all going to turn on you at some point. So being a conservative is the only place to go. 4. McCain is now the third oldest candidate in the race. 1. Nader 2. Paul 3. McCain New campaign slogan: "Don't vote for the old guy or the young guy, vote for the middle-aged guy: John McCain" or "Bush, Chaney, McCain: the legacy of Ralph Nader" or "Happy Days are Here Again for 97,000 Nader voters in Florida." 5. New Dem. talking points: Nader isn't relevant. (Really? Does Gore agree?)
I thought Hillary (I don't like to call her "Clinton", I feel like that's a man-ish way of identifying her.) sounded better than she ever has. She was on top of her game, her statements were well thought out, but most of the things she said related back to Obama one way or another, and vice versa. Both candidates used more "us" and "we" than I've ever heard. For what I watched of the debate, they seemed curiously cohesive...
Xerox. Ha. x's that sound like z's, do we even use THOSE anymore? Poor Hillary, though! However, I think she CAN play that to her advantage, she's got people making photocopies FOR her, not as many as before, but still - she's not concerning herself with what they're called. She's focused on the issues! She's got Texas and Ohio to win! There. I can be her new campaign manager.
Concerning the debate, no one really benefitted much. Obama did exactly what he needed to do, and Clinton lost a little ground on her dated "Xerox" comment, but gained it back on her last comment. Nader running again. He's just always there isn't he? McCain, Huckabee, and the rest of the Republicans are sure welcoming him into the race... the Democrats, not so much. Nader still incites rage into me each time I see him--I am yet to forgive him for 2000. If a man knows he has never had a feasible chance of winning why run? I doubt he'll have a gigantic impact, but he is still stealing away Democratic votes. And he angers me.
Couldn't watch the debate, BUT... I did catch the highlight reel on CNN.
I thought Obama handled the plagiarism topic insanely well. He kept his cool and Clinton turned out looking downright foolish or as Obama would call it, "silly." I don't think we'll hear the Clinton campaign talking about plagiarism anymore, thank goodness.
I thought Clinton's comment on the economy where she said that the wealthy have had a president for the past seven years and now it's time for the rest of America to have a president was pretty powerful. (It went something like that.)
Both seemed like they did very well in the debate.
So there was absolutely nothing on at the hotel I was at this weekend, so I was watching CNN for way too long. Did anyone else happen to catch Hillary saying "Shame on you, Barack Obama"? My sister and I were just laughing at her. She seems like she's getting desperate. All she's doing now is hurting the democratic party.
Debate #19 really didn't have much of an effect, positive or negative, for either candidate. Both spoke well: Clinton ending on a high-note and seemed a little more human than usual, and Obama remained confidant and composed throughout. Overall, the debate didn't really bring anything new to the table; therefore, a chance for new supporters is slim to none.
So I didn't see the debate because of musical and the fact that I don't have DVR, but I'm going to try and find articles and things about it so I can actually make a useful comment instead of this pointless stupid one that I'm posting right now. That's pretty much all.
I'm upset because I didn't get a chance to watch the debate. I had musical, and I forgot to T-VO it. Then when I called my mom and my brother to do it, no one was home. So I have to look it up on youtube.
Honestly, I completely forgot about the debates until I came across a TV in the Kalahari waterpark that had CNN on. Being the nerd that I am, I told my friends, (and yes, I'm refering the ones who left the "entertaining" comments on the blog previously,) to go have fun without me for 5 minutes. Unfortunately there was a crabby bartender who refused to turn up the volume, so I had to listen pretty carefully.
I tuned in on the candidates debate on immigration, which, to me, is a pretty important issue. Amazingly, I agreed with most of their views. I was very satisfied with the common view on immigrants learning english.
However, I thought Obama did a much better job on elaborating on his plan than Clinton did. In reference to hate crimes on the hispanics, I liked Obama's view on "reconciling laws and immigrants." I also heard something in his debate I did not hear in Clintons: border security. In the end, I thought Obama's views on immigration paralleled many of my own views. Point for Obama.
But there was something that I noticed that was making me SOOO mad at Clinton. She used the word "I" and phrases "I did [fill in the blank]" and "I was [fill in the blank]" about three times more than Obama did. I noticed a lot more of "Our nation..." and "We..." in Obama's debate. Obama=2, Clinton=0.
I'm looking forward to the possibility of another in-class analysis tomorrow.
I'd just like to add that upon reading the CNN debates online, I came across the article that Ralph Nader will run for President, (shocking, I know.) My question is why must everyone rip on the fact that John McCain is 71 years old, while, in fact, Ralph Nader is a whopping 74 years old.
Personally, I'm getting really tired of the stupid issues that people are having with the candidates and their personal characteristics: McCain is old, Obama is black, and Clinton is a woman. Let's get back to the REAL debate here people: THE ISSUES.
Oh man, I completely forgot about the debate. As most of the other musical folks have said, I'm going to have to either YouTube or hope to see some highlights this week.
Thanks to all of you who can to see the musical. I hope you enjoyed it and know that it means a lot to everyone involved that you came.
I saw the last bit of the debate, but as characters Hillary had a smurk the whole time. Obama portrayed himself more professional and with knowledge. Hillary attempted to show promise and change. Her last statements may have gained her several votes. From the view of the issues though, Obama won in my oppion. PS Musical was great!
Brooke-- McCain's age, to me, is a real issue. It's different from race or sex because it could possibly affect his decision making. I work at the Regency, so I deal with a lot of senior citizens, and I don't trust a person who is that old making such critical decisions. He seems capable now, but the slow deterioration of the mind is a concern of mine.
I don't think it was very beneficial for either. Nothing really stood out too much. Neither candidate wants to make a mistake because it could be too costly. They both had their good answers though. But overall, no. Neither candidate truly benefited from the debate.
Amanda-- I completely see your side of the debate on McCain's age. Believe me, in a matter of six months, my grandma began having hallucinations, was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, and now rarely remembers something she did two days ago. My only arguement is my strong faith that someone who is elected president that is having health problems, (if, hypothetically, McCain was elected president and did begin to have problems,) will realize that they are no longer capable of leading an entire nation and step down from office, leaving the position in the hands of the Vice President. McCain's not stupid, he realizes his responsibilities if elected president.
I think the debate was ok,Clinton seemed to be going after Obama the whole time. She did seem to be trying to relate to the people,to make her seem more human. But over all the obaminator was the best.
First, Vlad, you upset me greatly. I come to the blog with what I thought a terrfic finding, only to see that you had posted the same thing almost two hours ago. Good for you though for staying up to date :-)
Second, I think McCain's age is a huge issue, just like Manda. I realize that his mental capability is currently okay. Unfortunately, mental deteriorations can occur quite suddenly like Brooke mentioned. Most people affected by Alzheimers unfortunately do not notice a problem right away. The first stage is described as no impairment whatsoever. The second stage is mild impairiment with short memory lapses that are not unusual to the common person. The stages continue to progress up until stage 7 when people lose their ability to respond to their environment. It is extremely gradual. Having lost two great-grandparents to this awful disease, I know that not all individuals are aware of their decline until it is too late. It progresses extremely quickly. People who are diagnosed with Alzheimers disease are not "stupid". They just don't know that there is a serious problem going on until it is too late. Plus-the people of the United States elect a president to be their president for four years. I personally would not elect someone who I feel may not have the mental capabilites to make decisions for the United States all four years - just to have the unelected VP take over.
McCain is winning from the debate and also HIllary's newest attack, the more bashing between the democratic candidates, especially direct attacks at Obama saying he will need a beginners guide to foreign policy is only helping McCain
Jamie- In regards to McCain's age, I'm not talking about Alzhemimer's specifically. I'm not really worried about McCain having Alzheimer's. However, I have yet to meet an older person who remained completely mentally competent throughout their older years, regardless of whether they actually have a mental disease.
I just want to say that my great uncle is 96 and he wakes up every morning at 6:00, reads the paper, does some farm work, discusses current events with my uncle, writes, and reads the classic literature he has always loved so much. He has had a few physical problems (i.e. knee replacement, hip replacement) but other than that he is just as sharp as he was 20, 30, 40 years ago. Anyone who knows him can attest to that. I disagree with McCain and see him as the wrong candidate not because of the health problems that come with age, but his policies, his past record, and the way he has been handling himself this election. (Age, however, may play into a resistence to change...) I'm sorry but in the past week at least 5 people I have talked to spoke soley of McCain's age and how he's going "to like be like dead soon. He's soooo old." It's true that the older one gets, the more likely they are to suffer from certain diseses. BUT PLEASE. Focus on issues not age. Please.
Hillary should take her own advice and not "Xerox" parts of someone elses speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAYItnI-lPo
Also, reading the thread about the Wisconsin primary kind of concerned me. Many of you think that you HAVE to vote, and if you don't you have no right to complain. That is far from the truth. If you honestly have not done enough research about ALL the candidates in the field, you really shouldn't vote either. Someone should NOT vote for the lesser of two evils. Not voting is just as big of a statement as voting, if you do not like the candidates. Being "busy" or other reasons like that are not a good excuse, but not liking any candidate is a justifiable reason not to vote. This is America you have the right not to vote just like you have the right to protest. Many people decide not to vote as away of protest. DO NOT mistake not voting for not caring. Can all of you honestly say you have researched every candidate, if you didn't what were you going off of? And Yes i did vote, and yes i honestly researched every candidate, and I actually attended many of the politcal events that occured in La Crosse before the primary including Chelsea and President Bill Clinton, I saw Huckabee at the La Crosse Center, I saw McCain in LaX and I saw Obama in Milwaukee.
OK now that im done with my rant. Many of you know what fantasy football and other fantasy sports are and i bet some of you actually play them. Well i found a website that has fantasy congress.
http://www.fantasycongress.com/start.jsp
If there is enough interest, I/Mr. Bretzmann could create a league.
I personally see no problem with McCain's age. I purely commented on Alzheimer's disease because that is what Brooke had mentioned. I don't think McCain is slipping at all. I'm just saying that if that was the case...it could pose a problem.
I personally see no problem with McCain's age. I purely commented on Alzheimer's disease because that is what Brooke had mentioned. I don't think McCain is slipping at all. I'm just saying that if that was the case...it could pose a problem.
Well. It was strange when you said "I think McCain's age is a huge issue," "I personally would not elect someone who I feel may not have the mental capabilites to make decisions for the United States all four years - just to have the unelected VP take over." Also going into detail about how mental deterioration can go about in an older person... and then saying if it did happen it could pose a problem. But you say that "I personally see no problem with McCain's age." If you see a problem with McCain's age just say it. If you really see there is a problem with someone that old to be elected as president just say it (from your comments its obvious you do, otherwise you blatantly miscontrued your thoughts). If you think McCain's age may pose a serious problem later on, say "I see a problem with McCain's age." Its your opinion. I just would much rather talk about issues than age. With the way they're running security in Texas, Obama will probably die before McCain though. "http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html"
Wow. I'm glad to see I kinda started a debate here. But just as a disclaimer: I was using Alzheimer's purely as an EXAMPLE; I wasn't inferring McCain or any elderly mental handicap is specifically related to Alzheimer's. But I like what Joanna said: age does not determine a person's physical capabilities. Focusing on the issues is what matters. [P.S: I've heard soooo many people say the verbatim phrase to me too, Joanna: "He's going to die soon anyway."]
I missed the 8:00 debates on MSNBC but they're replaying the late night version. Sooooo... I thought I'd post.
As of right now, Clinton gave her oh-so-familiar Healthcare schpeal (< sp?) and, once again, "I worked on this for fifteen years...." Personally, it's getting old.
I caught the end of ABC News when they got insight from George Stephanopoulos about the debates and he stated, "There's not too much more they can establish at this point," and I have to agree. With this being the twentieth debate, the public is already aware of their standpoints on issues and has already made some decisions. How much more can they argue?
Oh wow. Clinton: "I have to ask why am I always the first one who the questions are directed at?" and now some mild attempt at humor about pillows and SNL? She's reached the point of desperation.
Hopefully someone checks this blog sometime tonight. I've been trying to get the vocabulary list up on moodle for the past 20 minutes and it isn't working. I can get as far as "Vocabulary List" and then it stops. I dont know if it's just my computer or it's a common problem. If someone who has the words already could e-mail them to me, that would be fabulous.
I don't know what it is, but there is something about Clinton's voice that just really irritates me. So listening to her speak in the debate was kind of painful. Obama seems as though he just has a really great plan for how he's going to help fix our country. I really feel that he is the only one who has enough ideas that are practical and will actually help change our issues in our country
50 comments:
I think that they both did very well. However, it was quite obvious that Clinton was trying to get a rise out of Obama and maybe cause him to break his character, which I think he almost did, but didn't, and did a good job of not bringing up the plagiarism issue up when he had the chance to speak (me personally, would've smacked her).
Clinton was doing a good job of spinning things her way, such as saying Obama's health care plan leaves 15 million people not covered, which as he said is false. One good moment for her was the ending where she made a rather good conclusion to the debate.
I personally think that two defining moments for Obama are: 1-when he talked about how the people know what and who they are voting for. 2-when he said that Clinton is implying that the president sitting down in diplomatic relations is a privilege for countries to earn only perpetuates the arrogance and stupidity of the Bush administration's foreign policy. We have to fix the world's opinion of us, and we wont do that by pretending we are better than everyone else.
Overall, I think although at some points Obama was not as articulate and to the point as Clinton was, he came out on top b/c he was able to point out the subtle similarities between Clinton and Bush. It suggests that Clinton will be another Bush, only on the other side of the political spectrum.
I also think that Obama's response to the question about McCain was stronger and more convincing.
Clinton was clearly trying to connect with the voters like she was able to do way back in New Hampshire. She talked about living there, shared values, Texans Barbara Jordan and Ann Richards (I loved Ann Richards).
Obama didn't fumble, didn't stumble. He did all he had to do: not mess up. Yet I think he did more. He talked substantively about Cuba, the economy, the fence, and others. I thought he hit the ball out of the park when asked about talk vs. action. I think that was a defining moment. My notes just said, "wow".
On plagiarism: "It's not change you can believe in, it's change you can Xerox." That Clinton line got booed. While that was significant, I thought it was even more significant that even if the line worked, how much more can she indicate she's from 'the past' than to say Xerox? People in 2008 make photocopies. Does Xerox even make copiers any more?
Finally, for the first time I noticed that Clinton talked at least twice about: as president I "would" instead of her usual I "will". In addition to that, the beginning of her final statement sounded like the beginning of her concession speech. Afterward they called it "valedictory" on CNN. It sounded like she knew it was winding down or it was already over.
It seems like the Mandy Grunewald wing of the Clinton campaign has won and they are not going negative face-to-face. Either finding her voice, or preparing for 2012. You decide.
p.s. Either way, these are both really, really smart, prepared, professional individuals. All of the candidates who are left are really impressive Americans. Like Michelle Obama, I'm proud. I hope the musical went well.
p.s. Where was the question about John McCain and interesting relationships with lobbyists?
Maybe they were all too distracted by his glasses like you mentioned earlier?
I like how the crowd booed Hillary for the "change you can xerox" line. I also hate hate HATE how she said (and I'm paraphrasing here)'I think everyone here knows I've been through hardships.' Is that supposed to be a good thing? Am I supposed to be proud of you for surviving through that? For someone who is so concerned about women's rights, she wasn't even capable of standing up for herself and leaving her husband when she should have. For this reason alone I have a hard time respecting her.
I have no idea.
I DVR'd the debate.
I was at the BON JOVI concert :-)
I'll blog later with my findings.
http://www.digg.com/2008_us_elections/Youngest_Superdelegate_Now_with_Obama
Interesting article concerning superdelegates.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23307567
The Democratic debate was really good in my opinion. It seemed to me that Clinton was taking stabs at Obama all night. She was also very personable when it came just to her talking. I thought that Obama answered the questions better like on immigration.
Overall. Good democratic debate. Obama will still come out on top.
I think that debate slightly helped Obama because he didn't try to attack Hillary. The debate also didn't hinder Clinton that night or Friday, but now I think it hurt her because of the sudden very negative campaign she's started to launch. This shows her two-sidedness. She now wants another debate. This would be, if I'm correct, the 20th debate, and if Obama agrees, she'll definitely be more negative in that debate. McCain wasn't affected at all by the debate, in my opinion. In fact, he's been doing quite well after the NY Times article because the Republican party became united after a liberal NY Times attack. So the NY Times helped McCain more than hurt him. Besides the conservatives rallying up, Obama's latest setback is Nader's announcement to run for president.
The debate was kind of bore. I thought Senator Clinton's answer to the last question, was amazing. The debate, I think, didn't help Clinton, at all, or Obama.
On Vlad's points:
1. Tuesday will be the 20th Dem. debate. It is already scheduled and has been for several weeks. Calling for something to happen that is already scheduled is a little odd.
2. The NY Times is considered a liberal newspaper. At the same time, consider this: a. they have endorsed McCain. b. they wrote investigative articles in the 90's about former President Clinton and a relationship he had with some intern.
3. Limbaugh is finally rallying around McCain while reminding him that these liberals are all "snakes" and they are all going to turn on you at some point. So being a conservative is the only place to go.
4. McCain is now the third oldest candidate in the race. 1. Nader 2. Paul 3. McCain New campaign slogan: "Don't vote for the old guy or the young guy, vote for the middle-aged guy: John McCain" or "Bush, Chaney, McCain: the legacy of Ralph Nader" or "Happy Days are Here Again for 97,000 Nader voters in Florida."
5. New Dem. talking points: Nader isn't relevant. (Really? Does Gore agree?)
I thought I saw a video clip of her calling Obama out for another debate in Ohio. My bad!
Ralph Nader is running for president.
Article
:]
Vlad,
She did do that. That's why it was odd! Not YOUR bad.
I thought Hillary (I don't like to call her "Clinton", I feel like that's a man-ish way of identifying her.) sounded better than she ever has. She was on top of her game, her statements were well thought out, but most of the things she said related back to Obama one way or another, and vice versa. Both candidates used more "us" and "we" than I've ever heard. For what I watched of the debate, they seemed curiously cohesive...
Xerox. Ha.
x's that sound like z's, do we even use THOSE anymore?
Poor Hillary, though! However, I think she CAN play that to her advantage, she's got people making photocopies FOR her, not as many as before, but still - she's not concerning herself with what they're called. She's focused on the issues! She's got Texas and Ohio to win!
There. I can be her new campaign manager.
psych!
Go Barack.
Concerning the debate, no one really benefitted much. Obama did exactly what he needed to do, and Clinton lost a little ground on her dated "Xerox" comment, but gained it back on her last comment.
Nader running again. He's just always there isn't he? McCain, Huckabee, and the rest of the Republicans are sure welcoming him into the race... the Democrats, not so much. Nader still incites rage into me each time I see him--I am yet to forgive him for 2000. If a man knows he has never had a feasible chance of winning why run? I doubt he'll have a gigantic impact, but he is still stealing away Democratic votes. And he angers me.
Couldn't watch the debate, BUT... I did catch the highlight reel on CNN.
I thought Obama handled the plagiarism topic insanely well. He kept his cool and Clinton turned out looking downright foolish or as Obama would call it, "silly." I don't think we'll hear the Clinton campaign talking about plagiarism anymore, thank goodness.
I thought Clinton's comment on the economy where she said that the wealthy have had a president for the past seven years and now it's time for the rest of America to have a president was pretty powerful. (It went something like that.)
Both seemed like they did very well in the debate.
So there was absolutely nothing on at the hotel I was at this weekend, so I was watching CNN for way too long. Did anyone else happen to catch Hillary saying "Shame on you, Barack Obama"? My sister and I were just laughing at her. She seems like she's getting desperate. All she's doing now is hurting the democratic party.
Debate #19 really didn't have much of an effect, positive or negative, for either candidate. Both spoke well: Clinton ending on a high-note and seemed a little more human than usual, and Obama remained confidant and composed throughout. Overall, the debate didn't really bring anything new to the table; therefore, a chance for new supporters is slim to none.
So I didn't see the debate because of musical and the fact that I don't have DVR, but I'm going to try and find articles and things about it so I can actually make a useful comment instead of this pointless stupid one that I'm posting right now. That's pretty much all.
I'm upset because I didn't get a chance to watch the debate. I had musical, and I forgot to T-VO it. Then when I called my mom and my brother to do it, no one was home. So I have to look it up on youtube.
Honestly, I completely forgot about the debates until I came across a TV in the Kalahari waterpark that had CNN on. Being the nerd that I am, I told my friends, (and yes, I'm refering the ones who left the "entertaining" comments on the blog previously,) to go have fun without me for 5 minutes. Unfortunately there was a crabby bartender who refused to turn up the volume, so I had to listen pretty carefully.
I tuned in on the candidates debate on immigration, which, to me, is a pretty important issue. Amazingly, I agreed with most of their views. I was very satisfied with the common view on immigrants learning english.
However, I thought Obama did a much better job on elaborating on his plan than Clinton did. In reference to hate crimes on the hispanics, I liked Obama's view on "reconciling laws and immigrants." I also heard something in his debate I did not hear in Clintons: border security. In the end, I thought Obama's views on immigration paralleled many of my own views. Point for Obama.
But there was something that I noticed that was making me SOOO mad at Clinton. She used the word "I" and phrases "I did [fill in the blank]" and "I was [fill in the blank]" about three times more than Obama did. I noticed a lot more of "Our nation..." and "We..." in Obama's debate. Obama=2, Clinton=0.
I'm looking forward to the possibility of another in-class analysis tomorrow.
I'd just like to add that upon reading the CNN debates online, I came across the article that Ralph Nader will run for President, (shocking, I know.) My question is why must everyone rip on the fact that John McCain is 71 years old, while, in fact, Ralph Nader is a whopping 74 years old.
Personally, I'm getting really tired of the stupid issues that people are having with the candidates and their personal characteristics: McCain is old, Obama is black, and Clinton is a woman. Let's get back to the REAL debate here people: THE ISSUES.
End of rant.
Oh man, I completely forgot about the debate. As most of the other musical folks have said, I'm going to have to either YouTube or hope to see some highlights this week.
Thanks to all of you who can to see the musical. I hope you enjoyed it and know that it means a lot to everyone involved that you came.
I saw the last bit of the debate, but as characters Hillary had a smurk the whole time. Obama portrayed himself more professional and with knowledge. Hillary attempted to show promise and change. Her last statements may have gained her several votes. From the view of the issues though, Obama won in my oppion.
PS Musical was great!
Brooke-- McCain's age, to me, is a real issue. It's different from race or sex because it could possibly affect his decision making. I work at the Regency, so I deal with a lot of senior citizens, and I don't trust a person who is that old making such critical decisions. He seems capable now, but the slow deterioration of the mind is a concern of mine.
About the debate:
I don't think it was very beneficial for either. Nothing really stood out too much. Neither candidate wants to make a mistake because it could be too costly. They both had their good answers though. But overall, no. Neither candidate truly benefited from the debate.
Amanda-- I completely see your side of the debate on McCain's age. Believe me, in a matter of six months, my grandma began having hallucinations, was diagnosed with Alzheimer's, and now rarely remembers something she did two days ago. My only arguement is my strong faith that someone who is elected president that is having health problems, (if, hypothetically, McCain was elected president and did begin to have problems,) will realize that they are no longer capable of leading an entire nation and step down from office, leaving the position in the hands of the Vice President. McCain's not stupid, he realizes his responsibilities if elected president.
sorry I have to state my error to prevent sounding like an idiot:
**argument
I think the debate was ok,Clinton seemed to be going after Obama the whole time. She did seem to be trying to relate to the people,to make her seem more human. But over all the obaminator was the best.
Clinton's latest attack -
BBC
First,
Vlad, you upset me greatly. I come to the blog with what I thought a terrfic finding, only to see that you had posted the same thing almost two hours ago. Good for you though for staying up to date :-)
Second,
I think McCain's age is a huge issue, just like Manda. I realize that his mental capability is currently okay. Unfortunately, mental deteriorations can occur quite suddenly like Brooke mentioned. Most people affected by Alzheimers unfortunately do not notice a problem right away. The first stage is described as no impairment whatsoever. The second stage is mild impairiment with short memory lapses that are not unusual to the common person. The stages continue to progress up until stage 7 when people lose their ability to respond to their environment. It is extremely gradual. Having lost two great-grandparents to this awful disease, I know that not all individuals are aware of their decline until it is too late. It progresses extremely quickly. People who are diagnosed with Alzheimers disease are not "stupid". They just don't know that there is a serious problem going on until it is too late. Plus-the people of the United States elect a president to be their president for four years. I personally would not elect someone who I feel may not have the mental capabilites to make decisions for the United States all four years - just to have the unelected VP take over.
Sigh. Back to AP English
to answer this question for the week,
McCain is winning from the debate and also HIllary's newest attack, the more bashing between the democratic candidates, especially direct attacks at Obama saying he will need a beginners guide to foreign policy is only helping McCain
Jamie- In regards to McCain's age, I'm not talking about Alzhemimer's specifically. I'm not really worried about McCain having Alzheimer's. However, I have yet to meet an older person who remained completely mentally competent throughout their older years, regardless of whether they actually have a mental disease.
I just want to say that my great uncle is 96 and he wakes up every morning at 6:00, reads the paper, does some farm work, discusses current events with my uncle, writes, and reads the classic literature he has always loved so much. He has had a few physical problems (i.e. knee replacement, hip replacement) but other than that he is just as sharp as he was 20, 30, 40 years ago. Anyone who knows him can attest to that.
I disagree with McCain and see him as the wrong candidate not because of the health problems that come with age, but his policies, his past record, and the way he has been handling himself this election. (Age, however, may play into a resistence to change...)
I'm sorry but in the past week at least 5 people I have talked to spoke soley of McCain's age and how he's going "to like be like dead soon. He's soooo old." It's true that the older one gets, the more likely they are to suffer from certain diseses. BUT PLEASE.
Focus on issues not age. Please.
Hillary should take her own advice and not "Xerox" parts of someone elses speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAYItnI-lPo
Also, reading the thread about the Wisconsin primary kind of concerned me. Many of you think that you HAVE to vote, and if you don't you have no right to complain. That is far from the truth. If you honestly have not done enough research about ALL the candidates in the field, you really shouldn't vote either. Someone should NOT vote for the lesser of two evils. Not voting is just as big of a statement as voting, if you do not like the candidates. Being "busy" or other reasons like that are not a good excuse, but not liking any candidate is a justifiable reason not to vote. This is America you have the right not to vote just like you have the right to protest. Many people decide not to vote as away of protest. DO NOT mistake not voting for not caring. Can all of you honestly say you have researched every candidate, if you didn't what were you going off of? And Yes i did vote, and yes i honestly researched every candidate, and I actually attended many of the politcal events that occured in La Crosse before the primary including Chelsea and President Bill Clinton, I saw Huckabee at the La Crosse Center, I saw McCain in LaX and I saw Obama in Milwaukee.
OK now that im done with my rant. Many of you know what fantasy football and other fantasy sports are and i bet some of you actually play them. Well i found a website that has fantasy congress.
http://www.fantasycongress.com/start.jsp
If there is enough interest, I/Mr. Bretzmann could create a league.
I personally see no problem with McCain's age. I purely commented on Alzheimer's disease because that is what Brooke had mentioned. I don't think McCain is slipping at all. I'm just saying that if that was the case...it could pose a problem.
I personally see no problem with McCain's age. I purely commented on Alzheimer's disease because that is what Brooke had mentioned. I don't think McCain is slipping at all. I'm just saying that if that was the case...it could pose a problem.
hey Doc, you should go read my blog... i'm bored and need to rant. just click on my name itll take you there
Well. It was strange when you said "I think McCain's age is a huge issue," "I personally would not elect someone who I feel may not have the mental capabilites to make decisions for the United States all four years - just to have the unelected VP take over." Also going into detail about how mental deterioration can go about in an older person... and then saying if it did happen it could pose a problem.
But you say that "I personally see no problem with McCain's age."
If you see a problem with McCain's age just say it. If you really see there is a problem with someone that old to be elected as president just say it (from your comments its obvious you do, otherwise you blatantly miscontrued your thoughts). If you think McCain's age may pose a serious problem later on, say "I see a problem with McCain's age." Its your opinion. I just would much rather talk about issues than age. With the way they're running security in Texas, Obama will probably die before McCain though. "http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html"
^^^credit justin for the article
Wow. I'm glad to see I kinda started a debate here. But just as a disclaimer: I was using Alzheimer's purely as an EXAMPLE; I wasn't inferring McCain or any elderly mental handicap is specifically related to Alzheimer's. But I like what Joanna said: age does not determine a person's physical capabilities. Focusing on the issues is what matters. [P.S: I've heard soooo many people say the verbatim phrase to me too, Joanna: "He's going to die soon anyway."]
I think I might have a new pet peeve.
I missed the 8:00 debates on MSNBC but they're replaying the late night version. Sooooo... I thought I'd post.
As of right now, Clinton gave her oh-so-familiar Healthcare schpeal (< sp?) and, once again, "I worked on this for fifteen years...." Personally, it's getting old.
I caught the end of ABC News when they got insight from George Stephanopoulos about the debates and he stated, "There's not too much more they can establish at this point," and I have to agree. With this being the twentieth debate, the public is already aware of their standpoints on issues and has already made some decisions. How much more can they argue?
Oh wow. Clinton: "I have to ask why am I always the first one who the questions are directed at?" and now some mild attempt at humor about pillows and SNL? She's reached the point of desperation.
Hopefully someone checks this blog sometime tonight.
I've been trying to get the vocabulary list up on moodle for the past 20 minutes and it isn't working. I can get as far as "Vocabulary List" and then it stops. I dont know if it's just my computer or it's a common problem. If someone who has the words already could e-mail them to me, that would be fabulous.
west422@wi.rr.com
haha that would be helpful
no worries. i got it.
I don't know what it is, but there is something about Clinton's voice that just really irritates me. So listening to her speak in the debate was kind of painful. Obama seems as though he just has a really great plan for how he's going to help fix our country. I really feel that he is the only one who has enough ideas that are practical and will actually help change our issues in our country
Clinton I think really does excell in Debates.
My mom hates her but was taken by her in this Debate. In a god way.
She does well. I don't care what you say, or how much you hate her. She did good.
Post a Comment