Yar-El Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Our economy's stregnth is uncertain; thus, I don't think he could pull off all those promises. I felt as though this has made him more of an entertainer or salesman. It was very thought out; however, it also felt very overkill. I still don't see what has captivated so many people. I don't see the savior everyone is talking about. I'm not sure if I will be voting for McCain this election; however, I'm sure that I will not be voting for Obama. He reminds me of someone who believes he is king of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I'm not sure if I will be voting for McCain this election; however, I'm sure that I will not be voting for Obama. i.e. Bob Barr 2008? He reminds me of someone who believes he is king of the world. Read: I don't like confident presidents. _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Obama infomercial ratings This just in from a Nielsen Co. press release about Barack Obama's infomercial: * Overall, for the six networks that aired the program simultaneously, the spot had a household rating of 21.7% * The last presidential candidate to air a paid simulcast was Ross Perot in 1996, which received a national household rating of 16.8%. Ouchy! Ross Perot and Obama allmost had the same number of viewers. Perot won 2% of the vote from every state. It looked as though Perot was making his case, and then looked what happened to him. Ouchy! I wonder if Obama is going to be another Michael Ducacus? Media during Ducacus's time were celebrating and the polls looked great; however, the nation didn't reflect what was in the news and other media. Too much confidence by the media? Are the polls that far off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Ouchy! Ross Perot and Obama allmost had the same number of viewers. Perot won 2% of the vote from every state. It looked as though Perot was making his case, and then looked what happened to him. Ouchy! Please, tell me how this association makes any sense. Are you saying that a television commercial makes Barack Obama equal to Perot? I wonder if Obama is going to be another Michael Ducacus? Media during Ducacus's time were celebrating and the polls looked great; however, the nation didn't reflect what was in the news and other media. It's possible- polls are semi-misleading. But, judging by donations and other Obama-events, I'd say that he has a good chance at attaining the Presidency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Please, tell me how this association makes any sense. Are you saying that a television commercial makes Barack Obama equal to Perot?It means that Obama may not have made his case. It's possible- polls are semi-misleading. But, judging by donations and other Obama-events, I'd say that he has a good chance at attaining the Presidency. His list of Donations have been in question. Several of his donations came from only a few sources and other countries. Country-Wide gave multiple small donations that racked up to be big money. I wonder if the books are cooked; thus, Obama is trying to hide some truths. Big donations from only a few companies; however, they are given in smaller amounts and anonymously. ABC News had mentioned such cases in Obama's record keeping. You can get many donations, but they could be only from a few sources. You don't need multiple sources for multiple donations. Something is not right in Obama land. Why have an informercial if you know your winning? You don't. Going to a rally doesn't mean your going to vote for the man. Some people in those crowds went to them incase history was in the making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Been watching Fox News or listen to one of the Republican talking radio heads? I've given multiple small donations to the Obama Campaign they were all done online. They collected my name, address, email address, phone number and occupation. They were also done with a Credit Card. Making everything easy for verification by the election committee. You know the people that track this stuff. Another baseless allegation by the right, funny I did not hear them gripping when they had all the money. Actually, I believe I will go make another right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Been watching Fox News or listen to one of the Republican talking radio heads? I've given multiple small donations to the Obama Campaign they were all done online. They collected my name, address, email address, phone number and occupation. They were also done with a Credit Card. Making everything easy for verification by the election committee. You know the people that track this stuff. Another baseless allegation by the right, funny I did not here them gripping when they had all the money. Actually, I believe I will go make another right now. I mentioned ABC news. You can still cook the books. Email addresses can come from any country in the world. Giving cold cash can be untraceable. Did Obama except any of it? ACORN commited voter registration fraud. Obama can cook the books in recording donations. ABC News - Fraud Concerns With Overseas Campaign Donations I couldn't find the actual article in relation to the news report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I mentioned ABC news. You can still cook the books. Email addresses can come from any country in the world. Giving cold cash can be untraceable. Did Obama except any of it? ACORN commited voter registration fraud. Obama can cook the books in recording donations. I preach sources - Fraud Concerns With Overseas Campaign Donations I couldn't find the actual article in relation to the news report. Two words: Credit Cards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Washington Post: Obama Accepting Untraceable Donations Sen. Barack Obama's presidential campaign is allowing donors to use largely untraceable prepaid credit cards that could potentially be used to evade limits on how much an individual is legally allowed to give or to mask a contributor's identity, campaign officials confirmed. Faced with a huge influx of donations over the Internet, the campaign has also chosen not to use basic security measures to prevent potentially illegal or anonymous contributions from flowing into its accounts, aides acknowledged. Instead, the campaign is scrutinizing its books for improper donations after the money has been deposited You may have to right-click and open the page in another tab. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 His list of Donations have been in question. Several of his donations came from only a few sources and other countries. Country-Wide gave multiple small donations that racked up to be big money. I wonder if the books are cooked; thus, Obama is trying to hide some truths. Big donations from only a few companies; however, they are given in smaller amounts and anonymously. ABC News had mentioned such cases in Obama's record keeping. I'll acknowledge that donations aren't 100% accurate, but when we combine this semi-accurate data with that of polls, rally attendance, and more, we achieve a fairly accurate picture of the populace's mindset. Something is not right in Obama land. Why have an informercial if you know your winning? You don't. Says who, if I may ask? For all you know, this commercial might have been Obama's way to reach out to the undecided voters. Or, perhaps, he just wants to get in touch with the voters without McCain smearing his name? I believe that your analysis is one-sided and unfair. If you're going to make accusations, at least acknowledge that it might be incorrect. As for attending a rally and not voting, that's a point, but I find it highly improbable: why would you waste your time listening to someone speak unless you intended to vote for (him)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Says who, if I may ask? For all you know, this commercial might have been Obama's way to reach out to the undecided voters. Or, perhaps, he just wants to get in touch with the voters without McCain smearing his name? I believe that your analysis is one-sided and unfair. If you're going to make accusations, at least acknowledge that it might be incorrect. Sometimes you have to look below the surface. Who said Obama was telling the truth? Only Obama can answer that question. We will have to wait and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Why have an informercial if you know your winning?Because if you don't play all three periods you risk losing in the last minutes? Because the McCain campaign has spent so much of their advertising money spreading lies and half-truths that it is worth taking the time to state the truth? Because Obama believes that people mean it every election when they say "I wish the candidates would take some time to really tell me what they're actually going to do, not what is wrong with the other guy"? I could probably come up with a few more if you need some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Litofsky Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Sometimes you have to look below the surface. Who said Obama was telling the truth? Only Obama can answer that question. We will have to wait and see. Indeed we shall. However, as you ask me to look below the surface, I ask you to look at what's given: we see Obama holding a thirty-minute commercial. Personally, I believe he did it to solidify his stance with the key undecided voters, and to further detail his plans, without the distortion of McCain's commercials. Was Obama telling the truth? Is anyone ever telling the full truth? I doubt it. I have my doubts that he will accomplish what he set out to do, but I have less doubt in him than in McCain, hence my support of Obama. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted October 31, 2008 Author Share Posted October 31, 2008 Indeed we shall. However, as you ask me to look below the surface, I ask you to look at what's given: we see Obama holding a thirty-minute commercial. Personally, I believe he did it to solidify his stance with the key undecided voters, and to further detail his plans, without the distortion of McCain's commercials. Was Obama telling the truth? Is anyone ever telling the full truth? I doubt it. I have my doubts that he will accomplish what he set out to do, but I have less doubt in him than in McCain, hence my support of Obama. Because if you don't play all three periods you risk losing in the last minutes? Because the McCain campaign has spent so much of their advertising money spreading lies and half-truths that it is worth taking the time to state the truth? Because Obama believes that people mean it every election when they say "I wish the candidates would take some time to really tell me what they're actually going to do, not what is wrong with the other guy"? I could probably come up with a few more if you need some. Ross Perot had at the time way more money than Bush and Clinton; however, it didn't stop him from loosing the presidential election. He outspent both candidates. "Perot turned around and did something that no one has ever done. He used television to carry his message to the Americans. Instead of public speeches, he purchased an hour of television time on NBC to sit down and "talk" with America. People watched his "info-mercial" and loved it. It marked the first time that a candidate had ever used the media to get their point across without the media being able to change it. The ratings were so high that he decided to do another one. In all, there were five "info-mercials." I ended up loosing the above quoted article. My apology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Ross Perot had at the time way more money than Bush and Clinton; however, it didn't stop him from loosing the presidential election. He outspent both candidates. yeah but he also had the personality of a dead fish and an appearance that reminded people of road kill. While Obama excells in personality and appearance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogue Nine Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I made a few of my friends who were undecided watch the Obamamercial. They're not undecided anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 Ross Perot had at the time way more money than Bush and Clinton; however, it didn't stop him from loosing the presidential election. He outspent both candidates. I'll let you in on a little secret: Obama is going to win, whether you like it or not _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astor Posted October 31, 2008 Share Posted October 31, 2008 I'll let you in on a little secret: Obama is going to win, whether you like it or not _EW_ I would laugh so hard if McCain did a Truman now. Not that he's got a hope in hell... I've seen a lot of conservatives moaning about this ad... I think maybe they're jealous they didn't think of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yar-El Posted November 1, 2008 Author Share Posted November 1, 2008 I'll let you in on a little secret: Obama is going to win, whether you like it or not _EW_ That remains to be seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corinthian Posted November 1, 2008 Share Posted November 1, 2008 Don't smoke 'em yet, Ender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderWiggin Posted November 1, 2008 Share Posted November 1, 2008 Don't smoke 'em yet, Ender. I've always been one to count my chickens before they hatch _EW_ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Web Rider Posted November 1, 2008 Share Posted November 1, 2008 I've always been one to count my chickens before they hatch _EW_ I generally prefer to eat my chickens before the hatch, but that's just me. Also: since I've pretty much only been watching the news for the past week, McCain seems to be dropping even in strong republican states, I don't really think he's got much hope for winning, certainly it's not impossible, but it's quite improbable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giant Graffiti Posted November 1, 2008 Share Posted November 1, 2008 I generally prefer to eat my chickens before the hatch, but that's just me. Are you suggesting that someone should eat Obama? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.