Comments on The Morning News

Ouch on Stockdale...

That said, I doubt we'll see that big a fireball if/when Palin implodes tonight.

But saying she does do well -- does anyone think that will suddenly convince America -- 9 to 10 point in favor of Obama America -- that they're all wrong after all and cause a tide of support to shift to McCain?

After the "season-ending cliff hanger" that is this debate is over tonight, whatever way it ends, what will the last effect be, if any?

*lasting

For some reason nobody feels bad making of Stockdale, who was a POW for longer than McCain was. Unlike McCain, he continued to display evidence of actually having principles in his later life.

But he was terrible on camera, so I guess all that "hero" stuff only goes so far.

yeah, I watched some of that debate at pbs.org last night and Stockdale was ridiculous. He gave another great line when the moderator suggested he start the discussion on a new topic (because of his lack of participation), I think it was "I'm about all out of ammunition..."

hah

but yeah, I'm hoping Palin will top that. I'm also hoping that the modified debate format that the McCain campaign rallied for doesn't make the debate less incendiary.

Jubilation, probably not at this point a McCain campaign game changer. But, in the Republicans' minds a good performance tonight supports their case that Palin is the bright future of the party in 2012 or 2016.

I do think that this election is still tighter than current polls make it seem. But I am beginning to think that McCain and his campaign took that British columnist's point about "who wants to be the president who inherits this mess?" to heart and they are now trying to lose because their recent campaigning has been lackluster to outright bad.

Or, McCain's dementia has finally settled in.

So Slog, is the "bailout" a good idea or not?

How about some discussion on this. Isn't it kind of wieird to see Inslee and Cantwell and a bunch of rigiht wing GOPsters opposing it and Obama/McCain supporting it?

I heard Jesse JAckson Jr. and a few of his buddies voted no, but Obama called them and now about 12 of them are going to swith and vote yes due to the relatively minor accretions of things they like. so overnigiht a bailoout for the wealthy (if that's what it is) became palatable to them.

Hm, is that principled?

You can tell similar stories on the right.

This part of the news is way more important that the relative importance shown on Slog.

I doth protest. Methinks just enough.
Thank you.

Unity--

Great clip. Not only does it feature Dan Quayle AND AS on the same stage, but it also answers the question, "What if John McCain and Sarah Palin had a kid?"

here is my fear: there is so much focus on the economy right now that it is taking focus off of what used to be such a defining difference between mccain and obama: the iraq war.

when it comes to the economy, people are not happy, and are favoring obama. but mccain and obama both agreed to the same bailout -- which makes it look like there isn't much difference. not only that, but people are still rooted in their beliefs about the economy. as wrong as they might be, you have right-wingers blaming minorities and dems for the problem, and suggesting things like lowering the capital gains tax. disconnect!

Elsewhere in that debate, Stockdale said "you can take environmental protection too far. If you purify the pond, the water lilies die". It was a sad performance from a guy who deserves to be remembered better.

Watching those debates -- CSPAN has been showing ALL the veep ones, going back at least as far as Ferraro-Bush I, which is when I tuned in -- one is struck by the lowering of tone since those days. Even Dan Quayle, who at the time was regarded by most people as being barely an idiot, comes off looking pretty sharp compared to Palin; and, you know, Biden's no world-beater in the coherent-statement sweepstakes either, sometimes. But people used to actually carefully outline their positions rather than just chant the sound bites. The Republicans used to call themselves "the party of ideas", but they haven't really had any since about the 1996 election.

@9: All those years of cuts in education have really paid off big time for the party of no ideas. It doesn't seem like a coincidence that the post Reagan era has seen a steady decline in the level of discourse. I stand in awe at the current level of flat-out unintelligibility.

In another ten years I fully expect candidates to communicate in a series of grunts and hand gestures.

@10 Idiocracy.