I’ve been so negative on the McCain and Palin campaign (I think justifiably), that I haven’t had too much time to dissect the negative aspects or questions regarding Obama’s campaign. Below I take a quick look at some of the issues that are warning signs or concerns or questions.
Obama once said yes to public financing
1. Any chance of publicly financed campaigns in the future are over – Since Obama changed his mind and refused to abide by the rules of public financing, he has far out-raised McCain because of private donations, each limited to $2500. As a result, due to his popularity and his campaign’s acumen for grassroots fundraising, Obama just announced his campaign raised over $150 million in September alone! That is such an unbelievable figure. John McCain, who does abide by the public financing laws, can only spend $84 million in September and October combined. It makes sense why Obama didn’t want to abide by it because he knew he can easily raise more than that amount by himself. Why limit his campaign to that figure? This discrepancy in financing has proven to be a very important advantage for Obama because he can spend tons of money in states he has only a small chance of winning, where as McCain has to use his money wisely. Obama has also taken out a 30 minute time slot right before the World Series game six! Future candidates will see how effective his internet fundraising strategy was and will believe they can duplicate that. No one will want to abide by the limits of public financing.
2. So where is all the money going to come from to fund Obama’s programs? – Although Obama has clearly been more detailed and specific than McCain has been on what he will do if he is elected president, it is still unclear as to how it will be done and where all the money will come from. He often mentions how McCain wants to use a hatchet but he wants to use a scalpel to cut costs. That means he will do a serious assessment of programs once in office, but as of a right now, we do not know which programs will be affected. The proposals he mentions are a common problem for presidential candidates in previous elections. They say they will spend this amount of money on this problem, but never give details on where that amount will come from. At least this is better than McCain, who has been vague at even what he is going to do. That being said, Obama’s ideas are still more practical and would better serve the middle class than McCain’s.
Barack the Celebrity
3. How far will his celebrity status take him or hurt him? – It is amazing the excitement that has surrounded Obama since he gave that famous coming out speech at the 2004 DNC convention. Since then he has beaten Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary and now has a comfortable lead in the general election against McCain. His speech in Missouri last week drew over 100,000 supporters according to a police estimate. Is there some anxiety as to whether this is part bubble? He has led an almost perfect campaign, from his fundraising abilities, to his calm demeanor, to his ability to inspire. Is he truly a “transformational figure”, as well-respected Republican General Colin Powell said this weekend during his endorsement of Obama or is America in need of any inspirational candidate that he has been elevated to a higher celebrity status than deserved? Only time will tell.
A Divided America
4. As much as Obama has inspired the country, can he really unite a very divided America? – The race is still relatively tight (in some polls, only a 48-43 lead) even with all the gaffes and negativity surrounding the McCain/Palin camp. Why is this? Why is almost half the country still undecided or supporting a grumpy old man over a young inspirational man? As some have alluded to, race still plays an issue in present day America, even if it’s now more of a below the surface rumbling. Can Obama unite this country as President even if a good minority just won’t let him? This one seems more out of his hands and more about how much America has changed or hasn’t changed in the last 100 years.
I have never seen a more lame duck president than President George Bush right now. His credibility and approval at an all-time low, and historically tied with Richard Nixon’s lowest approval rating of 24% or 25%, depending on which polls you look at. Trailling only President Truman’s record low 22% in 1952. As the economic crisis deepens under his watch, and candidates in the presidential campaign either desperately trying to dissociate from him or successfully associating the other with him, it is only the laws of the Constitution that keeps such an unpopular president in power. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has more clout than the president. When Bush speaks to the public now about staying calm and having patience for the bailouts to work, does anyone listen to him? What could be going through his mind knowing that even the majority of his own party has disowned him?
The amazing thing about George Bush is that he thinks in a very idealistic way. He has never seemed affected by the low approval ratings because he truly believes that what he is doing is the right thing and that history will judge him positively. He believes that he is making the tough unpopular choices for the better of the country’s future. It is a very hubristic and self-righteous way of deciding things and is ultimately at the core of the Bush Doctrine that says he has the right to decide what this country and the world needs, even through unprovoked offensive attacks. It is a very risky proposition because the unpopular decisions might never turn out the way he envisioned. For example, if Iraq’s fledgling democracy never takes hold and brings peace to a war torn region, and even worse, Iraq falls into sectarian chaos again, history will judge the decision to remove Saddam Hussein without clear public and world approval as one of the worst decisions in American history. If Afghanistan falls into eternal chaos again, history will judge the decision to open another war in Iraq as one of the worst strategic moves in American history. If Pakistan, a nuclear power, falls into extreme political strife, the unwavering yet inconsistent support of Musharraf will be seen as a highly expensive and unsuccessful decision. If America goes into the longest recession or depression since the Great Depression, no matter how the foreign policies have worked out, history will see this period negatively.
Although everything looks bleak now, the possibility that all things will work out still exists, at least in theory. Iraq becomes the stable democracy that is so badly needed in the Middle East. As a result, moderate politics are demanded by the public of countries in the region with autocratic governments. Pakistan’s transition from a military dictatorship of Musharraf to a democratically elected government takes hold and the restive public calms down. The Pakistani economy stabilizes and extremist views are pushed out of society. Afghanistan and the Taliban reach a peace accord and the country finally experiences stability and democracy. The US economy bottoms out. The wanton spending of the consumers, corporations and government is curbed. American values revert back to saving and frugality. As a result, the economy is more sound then ever. The Bush presidency is seen as the turning point to a more stable and economically sound America. All these still remain possible, however small they may be. Historians could potentially point to the Bush decisions as the start of an eventual stable Middle East and Central Asia. However, even if everything turns out well, history will most likely give the credit to the decisions made by presidents after Bush. Especially for the economy, history will most likely give credit to the future president that makes the hard sacrifices to stabilize our economy. The credit of a stable Pakistan will most likely go to its own people and government. A peace accord between the Taliban and Afghanistan will be seen as a last resort to bring peace to the war torn region, especially when things looked so good back in 2002.
The next twenty years will greatly determine the effects the eight years of Bush presidency has done to America and the world…
Bush Presidency Events Timeline (courtesy of MapReport)
The many non-doctored funny faces of John McCain during this 2008 presidential campaign! If I’m missing one, please let me know in the comments section. Which one is your favorite? Let me know in the comments section! Check back often, I will be updating them whenever I find more!
CNN’s Campbell Brown just put a commentary on cnn.com titled, “Commentary: Food banks instead of campaign ads“. In summary, she says the two campaigns should give campaign finances to food banks instead of spending them on non-impact negative ads. Instead of spending a combined $30 million a week ripping on each other, why not give that money to a food bank in Provo, Utah, or the Northlands Rescue Mission in Grand Forks, North Dakota. At first glance, this sounds like a great and righteous idea, but in the end, it is a horribly ill-conceived not-thought-through idea just to make Brown look good. Here’s the simple reason why:
People make political contributions for one reason, they want the candidate they support to spend it so his or her message gets out. There are rules regarding what the campaign can do with the money. You can’t just give it to a food bank! If that’s the case, why not just tell donors to contribute directly to the food bank instead of going through a circuitious route? If you want campaigns to donate the money to food banks, then where does it end? Why even campaign? Why not just stop everything in life and only do things if it’s related to survival? As bad as the economic crisis is, life must go on. As a matter of fact, the political campaign of this year is more important because of the economic crisis. So as much as Brown sounds all righteous and looking out for the little poor guys, her idea is naive and illogical.
Third Presidential Debate (Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)
In the third presidential debate yesterday, John McCain again used the same logic when asked why the American public has an overwhelming perception that his campaign is much more negative than Barack Obama’s. He once again responded that because Obama declined to accept his challenge to have ten or more town-hall meetings, he had to go negative. Had Obama accepted, the tone of his campaign would not be so negative. Huh? I don’t get the connection or the logic behind that. The only thing I can think of is that McCain is bitter and taking vengeance on Obama for not wanting town hall meetings. That just makes McCain look worse. Like a bitter old man who pouts when he can’t get his way. It’s like a child throwing a tamper tantrum because his friend won’t play with him. So instead he steals his friend’s lunch money, and starts badmouthing him to everyone else. What the… How old is this guy?
I don’t see the point of having so many debates anyways. The second debate was a complete repeat of the first one. Even though the second one was a pseudo-town hall debate, it’s not like McCain did any better. The third one was finally different only because McCain was desperate and had to throw the kitchen sink at Obama, which Obama gracefully dodged.
QUICK TRIVIA QUESTION
ANSWER – Highlight with mouse
The United States presidential election of 1964 was one of the most lopsided presidential elections in the history of the United States. As of 2007, Johnson’s 22.6 percentage point-margin of victory in the popular vote is the fifth-largest such margin in Presidential election history (after the margins of the 1920,1924, 1936, and 1972 elections). Johnson won 61.1% of the national popular vote, which remains the highest popular-vote percentage won by a U.S.presidential candidate since 1820.
Early 1980s – Sioux Falls and South Dakota remove long usury laws regulating interest rates on all types of loans.
Early 1980s – Citibank moves credit card headquarters in New York City to Sioux Falls because NYC had a 12% limit on loan interest rates. Sioux Falls soon becomes the credit card capital of the West.
Early 1980s – Delaware copies South Dakota and relaxes many state usury laws. Wilmington soon becomes the credit card capital of the East.
Credit Card Mania
The rest is history. With further deregulation approved by the Reagan administration and their belief that debt is good, the general public began accepting credit cards as a major alternative to already earned money. Competition increased and customers were issued credit cards with minimal background credit checks. Banks began lowering rates to risky customers because they can cover their defaults and risks by spreading the costs to their new base of stable customers. This is similar to how insurance companies work. Credit bureaus began collecting tons of data on consumers and banks would analyze them to target specific consumers. Credit cards became the most profitable section of the banking industry with $30 billion in profits in 2003.
Personal debts skyrocketed. Other forms of credit cards were freely issued. Stores began issuing them. To stay competitive, banks began offering cash back and rewards programs. In essence, the entire profit of the credit card industry was based on taking money from the future livelihoods of consumers. For the first time ever, the savings rate of Americans became negative.
Before credit cards, Americans were known to be good savers. Since the deregulation of interest rates, Americans have less money than ever. They have mortgaged their futures to support their current exorbitant living standards.
Consequences of deregulating NYC Rents
COMMENTARY
Not all regulation is bad, and not all regulation is good. It has to be done carefully and with plenty of oversight. There has been or is regulation everywhere in our lives. When we were kids, our parents and teachers regulated what we ate, how much money we had, and how to spend our time. When we are at work, companies and labor laws regulate our actions. When we are in public places, there are laws and regulations. It has been shown that people as an entity are not responsible and disciplined enough to regulate all their individual needs. When most of us don’t know how credit cards work or how mortgages work or how our health care works, is this really the time to deregulate more? As our daily lives become more complicated, the last thing that people want to worry about is monitoring their 401k everyday, deciding which health plan to buy and wondering which mortgage to get. Some things we want the government to do for us, and to look out for us, and to make things easier in our lives. We don’t always want to make decisions and tough choices. Look at the obesity rate in this country. You think most people can take care of themselves? There needs to be a balance of both. There has been too much deregulation the past 30+ years and it has led to many of the major problems in this country right now.
Don’t think deregulation is always in the interest of consumers either. Yes, there is usually more competition which leads to lower prices, but you have to remember, that these super-humans…err.. corporations still need to make a profit. At the end of the day, they will find a way to pass that cost onto you, either by cutting corners (airlines), or charging for non-necessities. Have more faith in our government that it can still do the right thing. Bring more faith to the government by voting in people that actually are practical and look out for the interests of middle class America.
The latest cover story of Newsweek titled “The Palin Problem” is an excellent article. It explains in pretty basic terms why Palin’s argument for why she is a great VP candidate because she is a Joe Six-Pack or a Hockey Mom is so illogical and completely absurd. The problem facing Washington is not that America wants a regular Joe Shmoe in the office, it wants an exceptional person that looks out for the interests and fights for the Joe Six-Packs and the Hockey Moms of America. We don’t actually want one in office. Seriously, I definitely do not want a beer drinking, pot-belly scratching smelly Joe Six-Pack as Vice-President. I also don’t want a Hockey Mom in office either! When I go to a bar to watch football, I don’t see a single person I want as potential President of the United States.
Palin needs to focus more on what she has done as Governor and what she has done for the middle class of America. We want our leaders to strive for excellence, and to have a history of excellence. We expect more from them, and that’s the current problem with Washington. Does John McCain, with 7 houses and 11 automobiles really understand the problems facing the middle class? Does George Bush with his huge Texas ranch and political and elitist family connections really understand what the average worker in Pennsylvania is going thru? We haven’t had an exceptional leader who understood middle class America in a long time. Sarah Palin is not the answer. She might understand what middle class America is going through, but she doesn’t have the experience or history of striving for excellence to do what is right. Obama at least offers us that hope. Even Biden and his history of traveling to and from work every day and middle class connections has more of it.
Say no to Mrs. Hockey Mom and Mrs. Joe Six-Pack. So sick of hearing those words. Can’t she come up with better phrases and arguments…And she needs to stop saying she’s a Washington outsider. She’s way too much of a Washington outsider. Seriously, I can’t imagine her as president. It is a really scary thought to think if she is President what she would do to fix the huge economic crisis…
With so much negative attention on Sarah Palin and her obvious lack of experience, it’s time to take a look at who is the worst vice-president or vice-presidential candidate in recent years. Here are the four candidates.in chronological order. Please vote who you think is the worst in the poll.
Dan Quayle
1. Dan Quayle – George HW Bush’s VP (1988-1992) – Quayle was intellectually incompetent and had the foot-in-mouth disease. Po-tay-to, po-tah-to, either one is fine. But potatoe?? What about Quayle comparing himself to JFK during the election campaign? Other funny sayings? “We don’t want to go back to tomorrow, we want to go forward“, “The future will be better tomorrow“, “I love California. I practically grew up in Phoenix“, and “It’s time for the human race to enter the solar system“. Although the country mostly knows him as the vice-president, another interesting question that needed to be asked, what were the people in Indiana thinking electing him to the House in1976 and 1978, and Senate in 1980 and 1986?
Vice Admiral James Stockdale
2. James Stockdale – Ross Perot’s running mate (1992) – Stockdale infamously opened the VP debate by saying, “Who am I? Why am I here?” Initially, the rhetorical questions drew applause from the audience, [4] seeming to be a good-natured acknowledgment of his relatively unknown status and lack of traditional qualifications. However, his unfocused style for the rest of the debate (including asking the moderator to repeat one question because he didn’t have his hearing aid turned on) made him appear confused and almost disoriented. An unflattering recreation of the moment on Saturday Night Live later that week, with Phil Hartman as Stockdale, cemented a public perception of Stockdale as slow-witted. He was also often parodied for his constant use of the word “gridlock” to describe slow governmental policy. As his introduction to the large segment of American voters who had not previously heard of him, the debate was disastrous for Stockdale. He was portrayed in the media as elderly and confused, and his reputation never recovered. (source: Wikipedia)
4. Sarah Palin – John McCain’s running mate (2008) – Blunders, lies, inexperience has made Palin the butt of many jokes, especially on Saturday Night Live.
The failed bailout plan is another in a long line of political campaign moves that has blown up in John McCain’s increasingly desperate campaign. Here are the top three:
Where is Sarah Palin?
1. Picking Sarah Palin as Vice-Presidential candidate – When McCain saw that a large amount of Hillary Clinton supporters were still upset at Obama’s handling of the VP vetting process and eventual selection of Joe Biden, he took that as an opportunity to kill three birds with one stone. To appease the Clinton supporters and disenchanted female voters by selecting a young female candidate. To fortify his maverick reputation by selecting someone no one expected and is a Washington outsider. And to excite his core conservative base by selecting someone who is pro-life and pro-gun.
This move worked for exactly one week. Although it did and still does excite his core constituency, he has instead turned off the independent voters, women and solidified Obama’s base. Palin has since been exposed as someone completely inexperienced and out of her league. McCain has had to retract several of her public statements. His campaign has hidden her from the public view for fear of her saying something to the detriment of his campaign. While Biden has performed over 100 public interviews since his selection, Palin has done less than 10. He has surrounded her with former Bush advisers in training her to follow his views instead of her own views. Instead of a game changer, she has become a distraction and stress.
McCain hugs Bush
2. Choosing to use lies, misinformation and misdirections in campaign – McCain’s campaign has increasingly used devious tactics in attempts to dishonestly smear Obama. The lies and misinformation have been so obvious that the majority of the media and public have picked this up. McCain instead lambasted the media for being biased, and that has also backfired. Instead of talking about issues, the campaign has used misdirections and attacks instead of responding with what they would do. It is becoming increasingly clear that his campaign is being influenced by the ultra-aggressive campaign advisers from George Bush. The whole win at all costs is backfiring at a time when the country wants honest change and not the same ole political moves.
McCain suspends campaign
3. Suspending campaign to push for bailout plan – The latest move backfiring on McCain might be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. Because the public views Obama as someone better capable to address the economy, McCain had to do something to show he is more capable at handling the economy. Last week, he decided to suspend his campaign, including the scheduled Friday debate with Obama, to go to Washington and push for the bailout plan. What seemed like a focused move was seen by the media and public as purely a political move. It only accentuated his potential inability to handle multiple crises as president. People clamored that if he was president, he can’t just put one crisis on pause while he handles another. Additionally, the public especially wanted to see the candidates speak at a debate, at a critical time like this. They saw it as a cop-out by McCain to suspend the debate. To make matters worse, legislators from both parties in Washington saw him as a distraction to the experts dealing with the bailout plan. As the bailout neared for a likely success, McCain began attacks at Obama for not doing enough to help the bailout plan and began patting himself on the back for pushing for the plan. However, in a stunning final straw, the bailout plan was rejected in the House yesterday. More than 60% of his party voted against the plan that McCain said he aggressively pushed for. McCain’s ability to even convince his own party had failed miserably. The public was strongly against a plan that seemed to bail out Wall Street and not help the common people. It will be interesting to see the fallout from this in the coming polls.
Silent Archimedes 