discussing the presidential election, a challenge of sorts

[Eagledad 2783]

>>Eagledad, you're totally mischaracterizing packsaddle's argument with TheScout.

[packsaddle 753]

Eagledad, you do not understand this interaction. I have not attempted to 'debate' TheScout. I'm still not engaged in a debate. Read my post in which I asked my questions. Not a single one of those questions is a challenge. Each and every one of them is a request for information. He made a statement in which I have an interest. I've engaged in applied, basic, private, public, and now academic research. I merely wanted to know the evidence or source of support he had for his assertions. His assertions were many and so were my questions.

 

I never said that I disagreed with a single one of his assertions. I merely want to know on what basis he makes those claims so that I can DECIDE whether or not to agree with him.

I have given him many chances to bring the data, evidence, or sources of support to this forum. He hasn't.

Instead, he has attempted to direct the discussion away from my questions. The closest he came to answering is his statement that he doesn't have time to do the research. It is not a clear statement that he has no evidence whatsoever to back up his assertion. That statement leaves its interpretation to the reader. He basically tried to brush me off.

His later explanation that he only intended the original assertion to be a generality is pointless. DUH! Of course it was a generality! THAT's part of my reason for asking for the evidence in the first place.

Left to interpret his disinterest in actually doing research, I must conclude that his statements about people who DO research must be based on nothing whatsoever and if I hypothesize that his approach is from one of prejudice, he has provided no evidence to the contrary. But even prejudice can have a basis and he hasn't even provided his evidence for THAT.

 

I am still waiting for some evidence for his assertions. Or else an explicit admission that he has no basis for them.

 

Edited Part: typo, and a word change.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[OldGreyEagle 5]

Rythos asks where the normal people are, I started this thread 8/29/08 as a challenge to have people explain why they were for a particular candidate, not why they didnt like another. The Thread went cold on 9/3/08. That was six days and most of the entries were not positive comments on candiates people supported.

 

So, again, who do you support and why? And no fair saying I am for A because B is a dirty rotten scoundrel. Can it be done?

[gwd-scouter 11]

I already posted my reasons for supporting Obama. I'll chime in again now to post another reason.

 

Senator Obama has received much criticism about his youth, inexperience, and that he's not ready to lead. During this financial fiasco we have going on, his steadiness, calm demeanor, and ability to come up with ideas to help shows me that he is ready to lead.

 

"We need a steady hand at the tiller during this crisis." I agree. For me, that steady hand belongs to Obama.

[packsaddle 753]

OGE, thanks for restarting this one. I apologize for turning everyone off from the intended topic although I believe I had some help with that.

 

I support Obama. I have some positive reasons that I will list but as I have noted in other threads, this is after I throw out the negative ones which I believe are shared by both candidates.

I am deeply saddened by the lack of realism displayed by both candidates with regard to energy. Actually, it is embarrassing as well, because energy policy since Reagan has been little better than could have been expected from ignoramuses.

And with the exception of a brief hiatus during the Clinton years, economic policy has been little better.

The Iraq debacle is going to drain our treasury and our blood for a very long time to come and this will not change regardless of who is elected. Obama might think he can extract us from this fate but I doubt it. I hope I'm wrong.

 

I see net positive factors in Obama's support of science and education.

The two candidates don't really differ much regarding the issue of global climate change but then, they don't really have much of a way to influence things on that topic either.

 

In general, though, while a McCain presidency would be a breath of fresh air compared to previous Republican administrations with regard to environment, I believe that Obama again has a better approach although I see flaws there as well (mostly related to energy).

 

I see Obama as having far greater skills and opportunities to help address and perhaps solve problems related to ethnic, racial, or other social inequities. In contrast, the Republicans, at least in my region, are explicitly established on a historical foundation of prejudice. No contest.

 

For personal qualities, I simply cannot view Obama's rise from humble origins to leading positions as a Harvard student as somehow negative. I recognize that McCain was a product of Annapolis. But he was close to the bottom of his class in comparison. Yes, I know the two are difficult to compare. I have generals and admirals in my family so I do appreciate the difference.

I also am influenced by public statements by Obama's former mentors on the Harvard faculty. I believe he has the intellectual edge.

 

At his age, I believe that Obama has a better chance of remaining in good health for two terms.

 

I believe Obama's choice of Biden as VP candidate speaks well of a man who want's to hear truth to power from an equal intellect, with even greater experience and depth at least in foreign policy matters. By comparison McCain made a political choice. Palin isn't nearly McCain's equal by any measure.

 

I do not consider the Presidency to be relevant to such personal issues as religion. But the Democrats historically have the edge there, at least with regard to devout, born-again Christians. I say this to emphasize that my suspicion that loud noises about religious background are mostly insincere so I place no importance on those noises, thus coming back to my original position.

 

I am pro-choice so I see Obama as not that far from McCain, at least the old McCain before he was born again in the Rove vision.

 

At the end of this election, I will still have high regard for John McCain. He will not be President. He will still be an honorable man and in the Senate, although perhaps nearing retirement.

Obama will be President and I will disagree strongly with many of his policies (especially the idiotic ones related to economy and energy). He is also an honorable man. Once he is in office, I'll almost pity him for having to deal with what Bush left for him.

[SR540Beaver 116]

I would love nothing better than to tell you why I am for a candidate, but I don't have a dog in this hunt. Once again I will be forced to big the lesser of two evils.

 

I will say this, I think both men are good and honorable men who do not deserve the hate they both endure from the opposing talking heads in print and media.