|
|
Post by jgaffney on Nov 18, 2008 20:11:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Nov 18, 2008 22:40:18 GMT -5
just more support for my belief that we need a test administered before you get your ballot.
and yes, santurelle and mink, before you guys go flying off the handle i agree there are certainly a number of mccain voters who are probably just as misinformed.
geez!
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Nov 19, 2008 0:38:48 GMT -5
It goes both ways. Out of the millions of Obama voters they dig up a few that don't know much about our government. Big deal. There are plenty of uninformed voter out there on both sides of the spectrum. How about the evangelical church goers who flocked to the polls for Bush in 2000 and '04. That was maddening. Most of them were probably just as ignorant as the folks in this video.
|
|
|
|
Post by jgaffney on Nov 19, 2008 1:36:36 GMT -5
You guys are missing the point of the post. Even though very few Obama voters could tell Zogby which party ran Congress, the majority of them knew about Palin's $150,000 wardrobe and her pregnant daughter. The main focus of the website is the disproportionate coverage of the candidates, leading to the least-vetted president-elect in the country's history. So, we are either (a) in big trouble; or
(b) in for a very entertaining 4 years. |
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Nov 19, 2008 9:24:53 GMT -5
So, we are either (a) in big trouble; or
(b) in for a very entertaining 4 years. c) all of the above |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Nov 19, 2008 11:58:04 GMT -5
You guys are missing the point of the post. Even though very few Obama voters could tell Zogby which party ran Congress, the majority of them knew about Palin's $150,000 wardrobe and her pregnant daughter. The main focus of the website is the disproportionate coverage of the candidates, leading to the least-vetted president-elect in the country's history. So, we are either (a) in big trouble; or
(b) in for a very entertaining 4 years. Again, it goes both ways. Remember in 2000 when McCain lost to Bush in the primaries because Karl Rove put out the rumor that he had fathered a "black baby?" I would venture to guess that many people don't educate themselves before voting. They get most of their news from US Weekly or People magazine, not CNN, MSNBC, FOX, etc. It's no surprise that they focus on the drama surrounding the campaign and not the issues. They don't call him "no drama Obama" for nothing. He ran one of the best, most organized campaigns in history while McCain's campaign changed it's message daily and leaked information like a sieve. Obama carried a simple message of "Change from the Bush Administration" that resonated with the majority of Americans. It was a brilliant campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Nov 19, 2008 13:21:41 GMT -5
You guys are missing the point of the post. Even though very few Obama voters could tell Zogby which party ran Congress, the majority of them knew about Palin's $150,000 wardrobe and her pregnant daughter. The main focus of the website is the disproportionate coverage of the candidates, leading to the least-vetted president-elect in the country's history. So, we are either (a) in big trouble; or
(b) in for a very entertaining 4 years. Probably both. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Nov 19, 2008 13:23:12 GMT -5
Again, it goes both ways. Remember in 2000 when McCain lost to Bush in the primaries because Karl Rove put out the rumor that he had fathered a "black baby?" No, I don't remember that. But, it has nothing to do with people understanding how their government functions. |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Nov 19, 2008 13:25:01 GMT -5
Besides, McCain cannot father a Black Child, he is white. And even if the mother were black, it would be a mixed race child.
|
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Nov 19, 2008 13:28:51 GMT -5
You know why I don't remember it, it was done through push polling in South Carolina. And, McCain does have a daughter who is Black. I would like you to meet Bridget McCain, daughter of John McCain:  |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Nov 19, 2008 13:47:40 GMT -5
From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whisper_campaign During the 2000 Republican presidential primary, Senator John McCain was the target of a whisper campaign implying that he had fathered a black child out of wedlock. (McCain's adopted daughter is a naturally dark-skinned child from Bangladesh). Voters in South Carolina were reportedly asked, "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain if you knew that he fathered an illegitimate black child?". McCain would later lose the South Carolina primary, and the nomination, to George W. Bush. In addition, on the week of the nomination vote, dozens of radio stations were called on the same day asking talk show hosts what they thought of McCain's having fathered a black child out of wedlock. McCain later said of the incidents:[1] "There were some pretty vile and hurtful things said during the South Carolina primary. It's a really nasty side of politics. We tried to ignore it and I think we shielded [our daughter] from it. It's just unfortunate that that sort of thing still exists. As you know she's Bengali, and very dark skinned. A lot of phone calls were made by people who said we should be very ashamed about her, about the color of her skin. Thousands and thousands of calls from people to voters saying, 'You know, the McCains have a black baby.' I believe that there is a special place in hell for people like those." |
|
|
|
Post by bolverk on Nov 19, 2008 14:24:27 GMT -5
Like I said, it was attributed to push polls in South Carolina. Which is why I never heard it. I don't pay much attention to politics in South Carolina. Nor dirt digging like you have engaged in either.
|
|
