DNC 2008 Thread

[strummer8526]

Aug 27, 2008 20:06:00 GMT -5 Bando said:

Clinton moved to end the roll call and nominate Obama by acclimation. Clearly, she's tearing this convention apart.

Yeah, and Bill is only giving the most pro-Obama speech he possibly could. "He is ready to be President." Alright. There you have it.

I said that both Bill and Hillary were going to give fantastic speeches that truly align them with Obama. It's done. This "party divided" nonsense has to end.

[The Stig]

Bill knocked that out of the park. Say what you want about him, he can give one helluva speech.

The bit about the Republicans saying he was too young and inexperienced in 1992 basically sums up the Clintons at this convention. Their message is "We are great, and because we're so great you should do what we say and vote for Obama."

[DFW HOYA]

Aug 27, 2008 20:30:38 GMT -5 The Stig said:

Bill knocked that out of the park. Say what you want about him, he can give one helluva speech.

Yes, he's a good speaker, but NBC corectly noted that he was largely painting by numbers. We all know his heart's not in it, but he gave it a good try. I think HRC was more compelling.

[The Stig]

You think that John Kerry might still be a bit bitter about 2004?

[GIGAFAN99]

Aug 27, 2008 20:42:55 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

Aug 27, 2008 20:30:38 GMT -5 The Stig said:

Bill knocked that out of the park. Say what you want about him, he can give one helluva speech.

Yes, he's a good speaker, but NBC corectly noted that he was largely painting by numbers. We all know his heart's not in it, but he gave it a good try. I think HRC was more compelling.

What might be worse is the half-hearted Clinton is about 50 times better at this than any candidate of the last three elections. I had forgotten how good he was at this.

I actually think McCain might be the best speaker since Clinton, though he's not even close. The Dems have rolled out three different versions of the Oratron software they've been developing and of course the Republicans have had the guy who lost to Beaker of the muppets in a debate.

Also concerning: have the Dems been on message at all outside of the combined lengths of the Clinton speeches?

[strummer8526]

"Also concerning: have the Dems been on message at all outside of the combined lengths of the Clinton speeches?"

Uh, did you see Dennis the Elf? He was on point. He was also surprisingly interesting. I'm not sure that interesting means good, but it made for an amusing few minutes.

[GIGAFAN99]

Aug 27, 2008 21:41:54 GMT -5 strummer8526 said:

"Also concerning: have the Dems been on message at all outside of the combined lengths of the Clinton speeches?"

Uh, did you see Dennis the Elf? He was on point. He was also surprisingly interesting. I'm not sure that interesting means good, but it made for an amusing few minutes.

I didn't. I actually would have wanted to. Did they show his wife, you know, for um, morale purposes?

[strummer8526]

I did not see any shots of her, unfortunately. But here's a video of his bouncing little self. I actually only caught the last minute or minute and a half, so the beginning might be terrible. He gets fired up at the end.

www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/26/kucinichs-democratic-conv_n_121622.html

[Elvado]

He gave a fine speech. Just remember that the man who just told you Obama is ready to lead also told you he did not have sex with that woman.

Just food for thought.

[Coast2CoastHoya]

Biden was awesome.

[SirSaxa]

Aug 27, 2008 20:42:55 GMT -5 DFW HOYA said:

Yes, he's a good speaker, but NBC corectly noted that he was largely painting by numbers.

Another example of the "Liberal Press"?

[strummer8526]

Aug 28, 2008 7:07:46 GMT -5 Elvado said:

He gave a fine speech. Just remember that the man who just told you Obama is ready to lead also told you he did not have sex with that woman.

Just food for thought.

I've never been President of the United States or been an adulterer, so I speak from inexperience here, but, uh...you think there may be a slight difference in how a person would approach those two situations? My gut just tells me that some men are willing to lie about minor sexual indiscretions, but I do NOT think most would lie about the qualifications of a person who, if elected, has the power to do wonderful or disastrous things for the country. One of those just seems slightly more significant and substantive than the other.

I'm gonna go ahead and believe the guy who gave us 8 years of peace and prosperity.

[theexorcist]

Aug 28, 2008 8:24:30 GMT -5 strummer8526 said:

Aug 28, 2008 7:07:46 GMT -5 Elvado said:

He gave a fine speech. Just remember that the man who just told you Obama is ready to lead also told you he did not have sex with that woman.

Just food for thought.

I've never been President of the United States or been an adulterer, so I speak from inexperience here, but, uh...you think there may be a slight difference in how a person would approach those two situations? My gut just tells me that some men are willing to lie about minor sexual indiscretions, but I do NOT think most would lie about the qualifications of a person who, if elected, has the power to do wonderful or disastrous things for the country. One of those just seems slightly more significant and substantive than the other.

I'm gonna go ahead and believe the guy who gave us 8 years of peace and prosperity.

Bill Clinton, for most of the campaign, spent a lot of time talking about how Obama would do bad things for the country. And his party would disown him if, during a convention to nominate someone who has a chance to break a losing streak AND who is the first minority nominated by a major party, he either a) didn't show or b) didn't give a ringing endorsement.

Bill Clinton's legacy remains in doubt. And he knows it. And he is also a master politician. In the words of Diamond Joe Quimby: "Very well. If that is the way the winds are blowing, let no one say I don't also blow."

Oh, and for the record, that eight years of peace included the West standing by while thousands were slaughtered in Rwanda, and al Qaeda attacked the World Trade Center the FIRST time. And the eight years of prosperity were heavily done on the backs of faulty accounting, which was revealed in 2001.

[Boz]

1. Bill Clinton is awesome at doing what he did last night. There is no denying it. But he and Hillary are still both going to be voting for McCain.

2. If there's one thing the "liberal press" likes more than being liberal, it's juicy gossip and scandal, so no, I'm not surprised that even some at NBC wouldn't want to let go of the story that the Clintons are still not fully on board. Besides, speeches aside (both of which were very good), you know they're not.

3. Dennis Kucinich is a joke, fellas. You may like him, you may think he's cute, but the guy really is not much more than a sideshow. He's not doing you any favors.

4. On the other hand, he was more entertaining than Mark Warner.

5. I missed Biden's speech. Sorry, but Bear Grylls was lost in the Deep South and ole Delaware Joe can't compete with that.

6. If every network and pretty much everyone in the audience already knows that Barack Obama is going to come out on stage and greet his running mate, can you really still call it a "surprise appearance"? And shouldn't the Democratic nominee be EXEPCTED to be there?
(Of course, I am thinking of normal nominees, not Intergalactic Superhero Messiahs who made it to Denver only after defeating the Borg, General Zod, the Matrix and Galactus earlier that afternoon.)

7. I still think McCain should forego an official acceptance speech and instead just walk around on the floor with a mic on and talk to delegates. Either that or apologize to the delegation for having to leave and then go down to Louisiana and help with evacuation efforts.

[Elvado]

I'm baffled by the DNC's decision to build Mr. Obama a coronation temple for tonight. The ads suggesting he's all hype and celebrity have gained traction (fair or not). To create this backdrop for a speech by a candidate accused of being a media-created celebrity plays right into that argument.

I don't see how this stage helps him. He needs to appear serious and as a man of substance,not as a self-defined Messiah.

[Deleted]

Maybe he should do it at one of McCain's houses instead. I'm sure some of them are slightly smaller than Invesco Field.

[Bando]

Aug 28, 2008 10:25:39 GMT -5 Elvado said:

I'm baffled by the DNC's decision to build Mr. Obama a coronation temple for tonight. The ads suggesting he's all hype and celebrity have gained traction (fair or not). To create this backdrop for a speech by a candidate accused of being a media-created celebrity plays right into that argument.

I don't see how this stage helps him. He needs to appear serious and as a man of substance,not as a self-defined Messiah.

It's the Lincoln Memorial. Today's the anniversary of the I have a dream speech.

Also, considering what Bush accepted the nomination at in 2004, I wouldn't talk.

[Elvado]

That makes some sense. I was not baiting Dems. I was honestly curious. He is a candidate with a potential "gravitas" gap. Celebrity themed ads have hurt him. 80,000 wildly cheering fans at this backdrop could backfire.

However, those decisions are above my pay grade.

It just might work.

[Boz]

Aug 28, 2008 10:37:53 GMT -5 Bando said:

Aug 28, 2008 10:25:39 GMT -5 Elvado said:

I'm baffled by the DNC's decision to build Mr. Obama a coronation temple for tonight. The ads suggesting he's all hype and celebrity have gained traction (fair or not). To create this backdrop for a speech by a candidate accused of being a media-created celebrity plays right into that argument.

I don't see how this stage helps him. He needs to appear serious and as a man of substance,not as a self-defined Messiah.

It's the Lincoln Memorial. Today's the anniversary of the I have a dream speech.

Also, considering what Bush accepted the nomination at in 2004, I wouldn't talk.

Except that Bush was actually, you know, President at the time.

EDIT: More disturbing than the backdrop is the opening act. Bon Frickin' Jovi? Reason enough not to vote for him.

[Deleted]

Non-partisan side comment:

Politics is (are?) truly baffling. The guy's trying to win what is essentially the biggest popularity contest in the world, and his popularity is problematic.

Mind-boggling.


Okay - back to our regularly scheduled bickering...