HoyaNyr320
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,233
|
Post by HoyaNyr320 on Sept 15, 2008 13:29:21 GMT -5
SNL = irrelevant to the election. Tell that to CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News- which all have stories about the SNL portrayal on their websites. Just because it's irrelevant to you doesn't mean it's irrelevant to the media and other voters- even if it only affects them subconsciously! |
|
HealyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Victory!!!
Posts: 1,059
|
Post by HealyHoya on Sept 15, 2008 13:44:49 GMT -5
SNL = irrelevant to the election. Tell that to CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News- which all have stories about the SNL portrayal on their websites. Just because it's irrelevant to you doesn't mean it's irrelevant to the media and other voters- even if it only affects them subconsciously! Ok, then perhaps I should have said "insignificant." A series of appearances on Leno, Letterman, Oprah, etc. by Obama, McCain, Michelle, Cindy, Meagan, et al, generate a bit (but only a bit) of quantifiable traction for national campaigns when they occur over the course of two years. A three-minute skit featuring a couple of comedic actors in costume on a show with declining ratings at midnight airing two months before the election is rather insignificant. With all due respect to the fine journalists at the 24-hour news channels, this is an amusing way for SNL to generate buzz for their season-opener. That's it. You're right though, that's just my opinion. |
|
|
|
Post by strummer8526 on Sept 15, 2008 14:06:07 GMT -5
For the most part, Healy, I think you're right. The only way something will stick is if SNL repeatedly and very solidly hits on something that is true and that people start to notice. I think SNL contributed to the post-debate reactions to both GWB and Gore in 2000. The sketches sort of provided a few bullet points to look out for: Bush making up words, Gore boring the hell out of everyone. So maybe if the candidates give SNL something to really draw attention to, it could create a positive or negative focus. Otherwise, probably not much gonna happen.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,480
|
Post by TC on Sept 16, 2008 9:21:25 GMT -5
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Sept 16, 2008 10:20:20 GMT -5
Gee, a Daily Kos poll. May be true but the source of the poll makes me want to wait for other polls to see if it's real.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Sept 16, 2008 10:43:20 GMT -5
Everyone knows my political persuasion so let me tell you my impression of Sarah Palin after watching her ABC interrogations, her convention speech and looking at her background and record. I do not believe she is qualified as of today to become President. I believe her knowledge of domestic and foreign affairs is insufficient for her to assume the President's role today, September 16, 2008.
Having said that, it's not clear whether or not she will become sufficiently knowledgeable by the time inauguration takes place in January. It seems doubtful. However, she appears to be a very intelligent person and, given some time as Vice President, it is reasonable to assume that, within a year or two, she will acquire the necessary knowledge to be qualified. She starts out with a set of core values (small government, lower taxes, pro-life, peace through strength, etc.) that would probably guide her in whatever choices she is called upon to make.
Is Barach Obama more qualified to be President today than Sarah Palin? Yes. Does he have a signicant amount of experience and knowledge preparing him to step into the presidency? I think not. Is he capable of acquiring this knowledge and experience? Of course, he is certainly intelligent enough. However, he does not appear to have any real core values since his rhetoric and his past actions and association do not seem to be in agreement.
So, to me the question is whether to support McCain who is far better prepared than Obama to be President but who is running with someone who is not, today, qualified to be President; or, to go with Obama and allow him the time to acquire the knowledge and experience required to function as President. To me, either is a distinct gamble.
|
|
Bando
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
I've got some regrets!
Posts: 2,431
|
Post by Bando on Sept 16, 2008 11:34:13 GMT -5
Gee, a Daily Kos poll. May be true but the source of the poll makes me want to wait for other polls to see if it's real. Daily Kos paid for the poll, but they didn't run it. |
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 16, 2008 11:47:35 GMT -5
The other poll on 538 seems a little more realistic, demonstrating that Palin has maintained positives for the most part, but her negatives have gone up, as they do with candidates in the spotlight for an extended period.
The first poll just seems like too radical a shift for a relatively short period of time.
Either way, yes, she is evening out somewhat. The degree can be disputed, but I don't think that's too surprising.
|
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on Sept 16, 2008 12:11:16 GMT -5
Yeah, maybe so, but what does "MoveOn.org" say?
|
|
Boz
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
123 Fireballs!
Posts: 10,355
|
Post by Boz on Sept 16, 2008 12:38:52 GMT -5
|
|
