OK kids, a new game and everyone can play!

Instead of playing the veepstakes game where we try to guess who would do a given candidate the most good, who is it that would most get under your skin regardless of where you stand now?

So, explain where you stand; Pro Obama for sure, then you'd explain who McCain could pick that would REALLY make you pro Obama. Pro McCain for sure and who could Obama pick to REALLY make you pro McCain. Leaning Obama, who would make you go Obama AND who would make you go away from Obama. Same for McCain. Just explain where you are and share with the class who just gets under your skin.

For extra credit, explain the course of action this irritant might drive you to.

For double bonus points, who could be picked that you'd be fine with?

I'll go first;

I don't like the idea of President McCain. I think Obama is a joke. I'm probably voting Paul. Maybe Barr. If Obama picks Edwards or Dodd, I might actually think about supporting McCain. Those guys make my skin crawl. He could pick Hillary and offend me less.

If Obama picked Biden, it would not bother me. If McCain picked Leiberman I'd be fine with that.

OK kids, a new game and everyone can play!

Instead of playing the veepstakes game where we try to guess who would do a given candidate the most good, who is it that would most get under your skin regardless of where you stand now? .

Gore, Kerry, Edwards, Clinton.

What if you think the current election is between a giant douche and a turd sandwich?

Somehow the possibilities for different colors of douche bag, or having mustard on the turd sandwich instead of mayo doesn't seem to make either choice apealing to me.


:ohwell:

What if you think the current election is between a giant douche and a turd sandwich?

Somehow the possibilities for different colors of douche bag, or having mustard on the turd sandwich instead of mayo doesn't seem to make either choice apealing to me.


:ohwell:

Perhaps the best episode. Ever!!! :buddies:

(South Park for the un-cool among us) :lmao:

For Obama:

Edwards - Proven loser as VP. Couldn't deliver home state for Kerry. No way he gets picked.
Dodd - Engineered the ENRON fiasco with Lieberman, so he's got a lot of baggage on economic issues, which look to be the determiner this year. Plus he's a Senator, and the rub on Obama is lack of executive experience. Dodd is out.
Clinton - :lmao:
Nunn - Nice guy, but another Senator.

I would say anyone with a Sen. in front of their name is a bad pick for Obama.

For McCain:

He's just going to be lucky to find someone who will say yes. I would like to see him pick Lieberman as that would make for an interesting election. I know my folks refused to vote for Gore in 2000 solely becuase he had Lieberman as a VP and they don't trust Jews, so the discrimination factor would be in play.

For NObama: Oprah Winfrey, Rosie O'Donald, Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan...:howdy:

I know my folks refused to vote for Gore in 2000 solely becuase he had Lieberman as a VP and they don't trust Jews, so the discrimination factor would be in play.

That's priceless!

"Well, I'd vote ol' Al or Dubbya or Johnny Mac or Hill'ree as long as they ain't got no damn untrustworthy Jew's with 'em!"

:lmao:


"Bob, why are you unhappy with your hooker?"

"She's a Jew!"


:lmao:

I'm anti-Obama, so McCain will get my vote as the lesser evil. If McCain picks Huck, I'll either throw my vote away on a third party, or just not vote for anyone.

I don't see Obama picking anyone that would make me want to vote for him.

I agree with the above, I think Obama will have a hard time finding someone who won't hurt him significantly, though I'm sure a lot of people would like to claim his VP spot, and McCain, on the other hand, will have a hard time finding someone to say yes.

Leaning Obama, I think the only Obama dealbreaker for me would be Edwards or Clinton (but I don't think he would be dumb enough to select either) and then I'd probably go with a third party because I'm really not all that down with McCain (he was my favorite Repub candidate, though). I'd be fine with Biden for Obama, but he's just about the only one I can think of that wouldn't harm his campaign. If McCain picks Huckles or Romney he's out, I can't stand Romney, but I doubt McCain would tap either of them.

I agree with the above, I think Obama will have a hard time finding someone who won't hurt him significantly, though I'm sure a lot of people would like to claim his VP spot, and McCain, on the other hand, will have a hard time finding someone to say yes.

I think Obama's best bet is to go with someone with good creds but no national exposure. You don't want someone with a big name stealing your thunder. The field is wide open, there.

If McCain picks Huckles or Romney he's out, I can't stand Romney, but I doubt McCain would tap either of them.

You know what's weird? I've read enough about Romney to make me wonder about him - oddly enough, the dog thing still figures prominently - but what surprises me is just how many people I have heard say if he taps Romney, McCain absolutely has their vote.

I'm still thinking Pawlenty or Jindal - or Palin, as a long shot.

Really can't think of anyone bad enough for McCain to pick that would change my mind. Funny, I used to think a Giuliani/McCain ticket would be a slam dunk.

Really can't think of anyone bad enough for McCain to pick that would change my mind. Funny, I used to think a Giuliani/McCain ticket would be a slam dunk.

...was PO; Pre-Obama. :lmao:


What dog thing?

...was PO; Pre-Obama. :lmao:


What dog thing?

You're kidding? I thought that was the most well-known story about Romney.

You can look up the particulars, but basically he and his family went on vacation and they put the dog in a carrier on the roof. At one point, they stopped when brown liquid came down all over the windshield - the terrified creature had wet and soiled himself, and the contents of his carrier spilled out. Kind of makes you wonder how could someone do something so damned stupid.

Here you go:
ABC News: Did Romney's Dog Suffer on Car Roof? (http://abcnews.go.com/technology/politics/Story?id=3329017&page=1)

You're kidding? I thought that was the most well-known story about Romney.

You can look up the particulars, but basically he and his family went on vacation and they put the dog in a carrier on the roof. At one point, they stopped when brown liquid came down all over the windshield - the terrified creature had wet and soiled himself, and the contents of his carrier spilled out. Kind of makes you wonder how could someone do something so damned stupid.

Here you go:
ABC News: Did Romney's Dog Suffer on Car Roof? (http://abcnews.go.com/technology/politics/Story?id=3329017&page=1)

...Clark Griswald strikes again. WOW!!!

You're kidding? I thought that was the most well-known story about Romney.

You can look up the particulars, but basically he and his family went on vacation and they put the dog in a carrier on the roof. At one point, they stopped when brown liquid came down all over the windshield - the terrified creature had wet and soiled himself, and the contents of his carrier spilled out. Kind of makes you wonder how could someone do something so damned stupid.

Here you go:
ABC News: Did Romney's Dog Suffer on Car Roof? (http://abcnews.go.com/technology/politics/Story?id=3329017&page=1)

I can understand how that might make you not want him to be the head of an animal shelter, but that really seems like a petty issue to not want him to be POTUS or VPOTUS over.

"He used poor judgement when travelling with a dog." Is that it?

The anti-Mormon crowd makes a little more sense, and they're :crazy:

...Clark Griswald strikes again. WOW!!!

That dog ended up as a red smear on the highway. This was a brown smear on the windshield. Apples and oranges.

I can understand how that might make you not want him to be the head of an animal shelter, but that really seems like a petty issue to not want him to be POTUS or VPOTUS over.

Please show me where I even suggested that...

You're kidding? I thought that was the most well-known story about Romney.

You can look up the particulars, but basically he and his family went on vacation and they put the dog in a carrier on the roof. At one point, they stopped when brown liquid came down all over the windshield - the terrified creature had wet and soiled himself, and the contents of his carrier spilled out. Kind of makes you wonder how could someone do something so damned stupid.

Here you go:
ABC News: Did Romney's Dog Suffer on Car Roof? (http://abcnews.go.com/technology/politics/Story?id=3329017&page=1)


LOL, so much for the PETA vote...:lmao:

Please show me where I even suggested that... :shrug: I thought you were implying it with this:

You know what's weird? I've read enough about Romney to make me wonder about him - oddly enough, the dog thing still figures prominently -

That dog ended up as a red smear on the highway. This was a brown smear on the windshield. Apples and oranges.

...but they're both fruit...










:lmao:

I can understand how that might make you not want him to be the head of an animal shelter, but that really seems like a petty issue to not want him to be POTUS or VPOTUS over.

"He used poor judgement when travelling with a dog." Is that it?



"Hmmm....we're running out of room. Looks like we're going to have to tie something to the roof. Hmmmm... :confused:
Oh...I've got it!!!!"


It's a barometer of his decision making abilities and thought processes. If he was that stupid about something so obvious, imagine what he may decide when it comes to something "slightly more complicated".

:shrug: I thought you were implying it with this:


Didn't think "makes me wonder" translates into "won't vote for" or "unfit to be POTUS".

Truth is, he was my favorite up until I read this - and then I thought, that is kind of weird, in an LBJ hold the beagle by the ears kind of way.

http://images.quickblogcast.com/115720-107998/LBJ_pulling_beagle_ears.jpg

"Hmmm....we're running out of room. Looks like we're going to have to tie something to the roof. Hmmmm... :confused:
Oh...I've got it!!!!"


It's a barometer of his decision making abilities and thought processes. If he was that stupid about something so obvious, imagine what he may decide when it comes to something "slightly more complicated".

...come on. People put the dog in the back of the pick up all the time, with ZERO protection. No big deal. There's a guy here in town that has a doggy seat on his motorcycle. Big deal. Anyone ever notice what dogs tend to do when they're INSIDE the car? That's right; stick their head out the window.

[B]It's a barometer of his decision making abilities and thought processes. If he was that stupid about something so obvious, imagine what he may decide when it comes to something "slightly more complicated".

.......................:killingme and NObama is the perfect wonderboy, you should follow NObama's lead and get off the COKE!!! :killingme

...come on. People put the dog in the back of the pick up all the time, with ZERO protection. No big deal. There's a guy here in town that has a doggy seat on his motorcycle. Big deal. Anyone ever notice what dogs tend to do when they're INSIDE the car? That's right; stick their head out the window.


Well that's why it wasn't a deal breaker for me. It just seemed stupid, for a 12 hour trip, to strap a dog carrier to the roof - if nothing else, the brown stuff should have been a red flag to thinking "damn - maybe we ought to let him out every few hours".

Well that's why it wasn't a deal breaker for me. It just seemed stupid, for a 12 hour trip, to strap a dog carrier to the roof - if nothing else, the brown stuff should have been a red flag to thinking "damn - maybe we ought to let him out every few hours".

...I'm sure they did. No one drives 12 hours straight with kids. No one drives 12 hours straight, period!

Hell, how much different can it be than a horse trailer?

It's a barometer of his decision making abilities and thought processes.

I see. Anyone who doesn't seatbelt their dog into a booster seat is unfit to be POTUS.

Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I really wish you were joking :ohwell:

And I thought nit-picking about letting muslims into the camera shot was petty.

I see. Anyone who doesn't seatbelt their dog into a booster seat is unfit to be POTUS.


Most people would find a solution to this "puzzling dilemma" somewhere between the two extremes.

Most people would find a solution to this "puzzling dilemma" somewhere between the two extremes.

So, is leaving the dog unrestrained in the back of a pickup more or less extreme than securing it in a carrier on top of a car? Which one is more likely to lead to injury or death?

So, is leaving the dog unrestrained in the back of a pickup more or less extreme than securing it in a carrier on top of a car? Which one is more likely to lead to injury or death?

I wouldn't do either...especially for a 12 hour trip at highway speeds. And Romney didn't have to choose between those two alternatives...so the question doesn't really apply.

I do admit that early on, Mormonism played a part in not liking him. I mean, I'm not even always sure about Christianity - but Mormonism to me is like believing in The Force. And you wouldn't vote for someone who believed in The Force, would you?

Well you might if it could be shown they did a damned good job at doing their job. I'd hire a kid who believed in Santa Claus if he was great at programming and statistics.

Mostly.

Oh my gosh, I'd forgotten about the dog thing entirely. :lmao: That has nothing to do with the reason I don't like Romney, though, that's a petty thing to pick on. I don't like his fair-weather stances on a lot of things, choice, gun control, gay marriage, illegal immigration...I could go on. But that's just me.

Anyway, I think McCain would have a better chance if he could get someone besides Romney and Huckabee, they had too much opposition among voters, and he needs someone to make people fall in love with him, because right now I think they're mostly kind of indifferent, you know what I mean? For example, people pretty much either love Obama, or hate him (with some exceptions, I'm sure), but McCain most people just say "meh." He needs someone with serious street cred to bring in people's attention, whereas Obama needs someone with a little less exposure.

Oh my gosh, I'd forgotten about the dog thing entirely. :lmao: That has nothing to do with the reason I don't like Romney, though, that's a petty thing to pick on. I don't like his fair-weather stances on a lot of things, choice, gun control, gay marriage, illegal immigration...I could go on. But that's just me.

Anyway, I think McCain would have a better chance if he could get someone besides Romney and Huckabee, they had too much opposition among voters, and he needs someone to make people fall in love with him, because right now I think they're mostly kind of indifferent, you know what I mean? For example, people pretty much either love Obama, or hate him (with some exceptions, I'm sure), but McCain most people just say "meh." He needs someone with serious street cred to bring in people's attention, whereas Obama needs someone with a little less exposure.

Sarah Palin - Alaskan governor - might be a good choice. She has the highest approval ratings for a governor - any governor - ever (often in the 90's).

I still think Bobby Jindal - governor of Louisiana - is a good choice.

That said, EVERY time I see Pawlenty - governor of Minnesota - he impresses me.

I haven't seen any other candidates for McCain VP that do anything for me.

Sarah Palin - Alaskan governor - might be a good choice. She has the highest approval ratings for a governor - any governor - ever (often in the 90's).

I still think Bobby Jindal - governor of Louisiana - is a good choice.

That said, EVERY time I see Pawlenty - governor of Minnesota - he impresses me.

I haven't seen any other candidates for McCain VP that do anything for me.

I'd like to hear your argument for him.

I'd like to hear your argument for him.

Basically, I think you'd like him. Smart guy - graduated HS at 16. BS at Brown. Rhodes Scholar. Son of Indian immigrant parents. As such - pro-immgration, ANTI illegal immigration. State university president. Brought Medicare in LA from bankruptcy, to in the black. Won his congressional seat with 78 percent of the vote, 88% percent in re-election. Won governorship with 54% of the vote, and won in almost every parish. Since being governor. he pushed his ethics reform in two weeks. Frankly, if anyone can clean up Louisiana politics, they get an A from anyone. Limbaugh calls him the next Reagan. Pretty solid conservative.

His drawback? Same as Obama's. Short resume. Big on talent, short list of accomplishments. Biggest difference is, however, he's about 8 years younger than Obama and seems to have accomplished more.

My dad's sentiment is - good guy, let him speak at the convention, throw him back and let him run in '12. He'll win.

My dad's sentiment is - good guy, let him speak at the convention, throw him back and let him run in '12. He'll win.


...see. I'm with your pops here. Clinton and W have cured me forever of voting for anyone much under 60 for the top spot. I just think there is a maturation that goes on once you've started slowing down some and you stop thinking you can do every damn thing and instead focus on a few big things, on clearing the path some so individual Americans can do their thing.

I wouldn't do either...especially for a 12 hour trip at highway speeds. And Romney didn't have to choose between those two alternatives...so the question doesn't really apply.

The question does apply. You said most people would find something less extreme than putting the dog in a carrier on top of the car.

Most rational people see putting the dog in a carrier as being less extreme than the common practice of putting a dog unrestrained in the back of a pickup. I'm wondering which one you think is less extreme. Where do you draw the line?

Of course, I already know where you draw the line. He's not a liberal, so anything he does is wrong. If he put the dog in the car and it crapped on one of the kids, he'd be a bad dad. If he left the dog at home, he'd be heartless. If he put it in a kennel, he'd be contributing to the spread of dog diseases. If he held it on his lap, he'd be an unsafe driver.

My dad's sentiment is - good guy, let him speak at the convention, throw him back and let him run in '12. He'll win.

I second that. A conservative candidate I could probably get behind. :yay:

I dunno, Larry has an interesting point about the maturity and pragmatism that you get from older candidates, but I still think that that can be reached before the age of 60. I support the trend towards younger candidates - why not make the average elected official of middle age rather than someone in their 60s, 70s, or 80s? That way they're not so young that they have no experience, but they're not completely out of touch with everyone under 50.

Of course, I might just be saying that because I'm young for the moment. :lmao: Check back in 40 years and I'll let you know how I think then.

...And oookay, can we stop talking about the dog thing now? Pretty please?

I I dunno, Larry has an interesting point about the maturity and pragmatism that you get from older candidates, but I still think that that can be reached before the age of 60. I support the trend towards younger candidates - why not make the average elected official of middle age rather than someone in their 60s, 70s, or 80s? That way they're not so young that they have no experience, but they're not completely out of touch with everyone under 50.

Of course, I might just be saying that because I'm young for the moment. :lmao: Check back in 40 years and I'll let you know how I think then.

...And oookay, can we stop talking about the dog thing now? Pretty please?


...the thing is in your late 40's, early 50's, Clinton, Gore, W, Obama, you've reached the peak of the balance between your physical vigor, your intellectual maturity, your world view and your ambition.

The dot.com bubble was pure vigor and ambition under Clinton that might not gotten away from from a more mature president concerned with what happens when the music inevitably stops. Same with housing and W. For people that age, at their peak, the music never stops. You just play a new tune. That mindset doesn't promote some of the stability many Americans simply need as we're not all prepared for whatever reason, to just keep on dancing. Illegal immigration is another one that needed a more mature, longer view of the impact on the general welfare. Having said that, Reagan kinda let it run free when he was at the controls, so, WTF do I know?

The question does apply. You said most people would find something less extreme than putting the dog in a carrier on top of the car.

Most rational people see putting the dog in a carrier as being less extreme than the common practice of putting a dog unrestrained in the back of a pickup. I'm wondering which one you think is less extreme. Where do you draw the line?
...
I would never drive around with a dog in the back of a pickup...or on top of a car.

Again, the question is irrelevant when it comes to Romney. He did not have to choose between putting a dog on top of his car or in the back of a pickup. He had to choose between on the car or in the car.

Even an idiot would know to put the dog in the car. Out of room? Strap the freaking luggage to top of the car, and put the dog inside. :dork:

I'm pretty much voting for McCain - I've said that since the Republican primaries were over - but if Barr picks up momentum, I would look his way. (my issues are #1-War on Terror, #2-SCOTUS, #3-Economy) I would feel better if he picked Romney, as I believe he has the businessman/economy experience to bring.

Obama: I agree things would be fun to watch if he picked Edwards because that would be a head scratcher. But - I also think that if he picked ANY woman besides Hillary, hell hath no fury like a woman scorned, and there is not enough popcorn to get us through November if that happens.

Didn't think "makes me wonder" translates into "won't vote for" or "unfit to be POTUS".

Truth is, he was my favorite up until I read this - and then I thought, that is kind of weird, in an LBJ hold the beagle by the ears kind of way.

http://images.quickblogcast.com/115720-107998/LBJ_pulling_beagle_ears.jpg


EEk.

I agree that the dog story always had me wondering, too. I heard it early on in the primaries and thought - whoa - they're going to make a BIG deal out of this. I wouldn't do it, but I didn't think they really were being malicious. I guess when you h ave so many kids in the family, you run out of room?!

Basically, I think you'd like him. Smart guy - graduated HS at 16. BS at Brown. Rhodes Scholar. Son of Indian immigrant parents. As such - pro-immgration, ANTI illegal immigration. State university president. Brought Medicare in LA from bankruptcy, to in the black. Won his congressional seat with 78 percent of the vote, 88% percent in re-election. Won governorship with 54% of the vote, and won in almost every parish. Since being governor. he pushed his ethics reform in two weeks. Frankly, if anyone can clean up Louisiana politics, they get an A from anyone. Limbaugh calls him the next Reagan. Pretty solid conservative.

His drawback? Same as Obama's. Short resume. Big on talent, short list of accomplishments. Biggest difference is, however, he's about 8 years younger than Obama and seems to have accomplished more.

My dad's sentiment is - good guy, let him speak at the convention, throw him back and let him run in '12. He'll win.

:yay: