Obama to hold mass rally for acceptance speech at Mile High Stadium

[Meeker]

No, you wouldn't, but if it makes you feel better to think that you would, go ahead and do that.

Oh, ok. I'm glad you can tell me what I think. "If it makes you feel better to think that you would, go ahead and do that." But please try to argue why I would. I've had no problem pointing out areas where I disagree with McCain so why would this be any different?

Do me a favor and stop being a worthless hack. Stop arguing like a child with "No, you wouldn't" and nothing to back up your claim.

Where were you when John McCain wanted multiple town hall meeting debates? Those violate recent campaign traditions. What about the regional campaign manager style? How arrogant of McCain to think he can try something like that.

You criticize Obama for breaking with "campaign traditions", yet when McCain does it you don't raise a stink at all. You're an otherwise rational person being blinded by your Obama hatred.

Oh, I don't know. The fascination with blaming Bush for not going into action right away when he found out about the attacks (when he sat in the classroom for all of seven minutes!), the countless minor verbal gaffes, etc.

Ah yes, because I responsible for everything that anti-Bush folks have said about him.

I personally think he made the right decision with the book, and finding verbal missteps humorous is hardly equivalent to calling a man egomaniac simply because he's trying to run a good campaign.

You have still failed to actually point to an example of myself doing what you are doing right now. So...

Do me a favor and stop being a worthless hack. Stop arguing like a child with "No, you wouldn't" and nothing to back up your claim.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Clearly this is going to be the #1 issue this election. Next Gallup poll will probably find that 30% of Americans consider Obama's elitism in holding his acceptance speech in a stadium the most important issue, beating out Iraq and the economy.

Who here argued that this would even be an issue? I know I'm not.

J. J.

[Keystone Phil]

Where were you when John McCain wanted multiple town hall meeting debates? Those violate recent campaign traditions. What about the regional campaign manager style? How arrogant of McCain to think he can try something like that.

I don't think McCain ever argued against one on one, regular debates with a moderator so I don't see what I'd have to speak out against. If he said he didn't want those at all then he'd be criticized. Again, you don't seem to want to accept that I have no problem criticizing my candidate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, I'm apparently just like every other McCain supporter who is just complaining about Obama because it's him so...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good campaign move or not, I still think this man is so full of himself.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fair enough. I won't provide an example until you can prove to me that I am only Pro McCain/only criticize Obama.

Clearly this is going to be the #1 issue this election. Next Gallup poll will probably find that 30% of Americans consider Obama's elitism in holding his acceptance speech in a stadium the most important issue, beating out Iraq and the economy.

Who here argued that this would even be an issue? I know I'm not.

J. J.

Quote? I'll admit that I didn't read this entire thread. If he said it, he's definitley kidding himself.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Where were you when John McCain wanted multiple town hall meeting debates? Those violate recent campaign traditions. What about the regional campaign manager style? How arrogant of McCain to think he can try something like that.

I don't think McCain ever argued against one on one, regular debates with a moderator so I don't see what I'd have to speak out against. If he said he didn't want those at all then he'd be criticized. Again, you don't seem to want to accept that I have no problem criticizing my candidate.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well, I'm apparently just like every other McCain supporter who is just complaining about Obama because it's him so...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good campaign move or not, I still think this man is so full of himself.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fair enough. I won't provide an example until you can prove to me that I am only Pro McCain/only criticize Obama.

Clearly this is going to be the #1 issue this election. Next Gallup poll will probably find that 30% of Americans consider Obama's elitism in holding his acceptance speech in a stadium the most important issue, beating out Iraq and the economy.

Who here argued that this would even be an issue? I know I'm not.

J. J.

Quote? I'll admit that I didn't read this entire thread. If he said it, he's definitley kidding himself.

He has a huge argument with Flem over it which then turned into a pissing contest over who lives near more blacks.

Starting here: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=78778.120

[Meeker]

I don't think McCain ever argued against one on one, regular debates with a moderator so I don't see what I'd have to speak out against. If he said he didn't want those at all then he'd be criticized. Again, you don't seem to want to accept that I have no problem criticizing my candidate.

That's not my point. You're criticizing Obama for doing something different than is "typical" but the only reason he's doing it is because it's politically advantageous. Yet when McCain tries to do something similar, like the new style debates and his campaign structure, you don't raise a stink and start calling him names.

Well, I'm apparently just like every other McCain supporter who is just complaining about Obama because it's him so...

I never said that. In fact I didn't aim my criticism at any one of you in particular, you just interpreted it to be against you.

Good campaign move or not, I still think this man is so full of himself.

I still don't quite understand how a good campaign move equates to being egotistical, unless you're saying you feel that way for other reasons, in which case the original statement you made contradicts what you're saying now.

Fair enough. I won't provide an example until you can prove to me that I am only Pro McCain/only criticize Obama.

I never said that. What I said was that you unjustly criticize Obama for breaking with campaign traditions yet don't object when McCain does so.

[Keystone Phil]

That's not my point. You're criticizing Obama for doing something different than is "typical" but the only reason he's doing it is because it's politically advantageous. Yet when McCain tries to do something similar, like the new style debates and his campaign structure, you don't raise a stink and start calling him names.

I don't think it's quite on the same scale. Obama is trying to do something totally different. McCain isn't trying to totally change the debate style.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You said I wouldn't have a problem with McCain doing this and that I just said that I would to make myself feel better.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Being in this huge stadium with 100,000 people isn't necessarily the greatest campaign move. I don't get why some of you are drooling over that.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And again I'll say that I don't believe McCain really has broken with it. He wants to make one change along with sticking with an old format as well.

I think you're also missing something. Obama can do whatever he wants. It's his party's convention. I just don't like this particular break with tradition. That doesn't mean I have to dislike McCain's "break with tradition" in order to be fair to Obama. They're two totally different things so I can have differing opinions.

[Meeker]

I don't think it's quite on the same scale. Obama is trying to do something totally different. McCain isn't trying to totally change the debate style.

That's still not the point. All I'm trying to point out is that you get annoyed when Obama tries to change campaign traditions, yet don't when McCain does, and therefore I'm trying to impart on you that if McCain had done this you might not be objecting as much if at all (as you're doing on these other issues).

You said I wouldn't have a problem with McCain doing this and that I just said that I would to make myself feel better.

I did say that, but that wasn't what I said I didn't say.

Not to sound too John Kerry like there.

Being in this huge stadium with 100,000 people isn't necessarily the greatest campaign move. I don't get why some of you are drooling over that.

I'm not drooling over it. I just think it's a good idea, and to be annoyed or to call someone an "overrated egomaniac" just because they want to try it is excessive.

And again I'll say that I don't believe McCain really has broken with it. He wants to make one change along with sticking with an old format as well.

What I said above applies still, but you're also getting hung up on that one example too much. My point is that criticizing a candidate, not just John McCain or Barack Obama, for going against a campaign "tradition" is silly and I don't see why you object to it, or how it makes them an egomaniac. Campaign "traditions" are broken all the time. Was Roosevelt arrogant when he flew to Chicago to accept the nomination? Some might have said that at the time, but now it's standard procedure.

I think you're also missing something. Obama can do whatever he wants. It's his party's convention. I just don't like this particular break with tradition. That doesn't mean I have to dislike McCain's "break with tradition" in order to be fair to Obama. They're two totally different things so I can have differing opinions.

Fine. That's not what I'm criticizing you for doing.

[Meeker]

You're probably typing a reply to this now, but I've got any early morning tomorrow so this must end.

I'll just conclude by saying that I do think you're an intelligent and thoughtful person (despite what I may seem to imply at times) and then also all that other feel good stuff.

[Keystone Phil]

A minor change in tradition - an addition to the format - doesn't deserve criticism in my book. You were trying to make the point that I'm not criticizing my guy because it's my guy. That's not the case at all since I have criticized McCain before and will continue to do so. My point is that saying I purposely don't attack McCain for something is wrong.

[exopolitician]

Nevermind people are still without a job, the economy still fcuking sucks, and the average price of gas is over 4 bucks. All of that is insignificant to the fact that Obama is holding his speech at some major venue where 80,000 people might attend. God...help us.

[Reaganfan]

Nevermind people are still without a job, the economy still fcuking sucks, and the average price of gas is over 4 bucks. All of that is insignificant to the fact that Obama is holding his speech at some major venue where 80,000 people might attend. God...help us.

Gas will be high on January 19, 2009...and it will be high on January 21, 2009. A president can't automatically make the price of gas go down.

[Sbane]

Nevermind people are still without a job, the economy still fcuking sucks, and the average price of gas is over 4 bucks. All of that is insignificant to the fact that Obama is holding his speech at some major venue where 80,000 people might attend. God...help us.

Gas will be high on January 19, 2009...and it will be high on January 21, 2009. A president can't automatically make the price of gas go down.

Yes but perhaps one of the candidates supported a policy which contributed to the high price of gas.( hint-Iraq)

[Brittain33]

I'd be even more pissed off if our nominee (either this year or in the future) decided to do this. Should we move the inauguration to Giants Stadium while we're at it? Or how about the State of the Union in the Superdome? Being at the actual convention makes it something. This is just makes it seem like even more of a typical rally.

If George W. Bush had done this in 2004--and he could have--Republicans would have been cheering and feeling like winners, and with good reason.

[J. J.]

Clearly this is going to be the #1 issue this election. Next Gallup poll will probably find that 30% of Americans consider Obama's elitism in holding his acceptance speech in a stadium the most important issue, beating out Iraq and the economy.

Who here argued that this would even be an issue? I know I'm not.

J. J.

Actually, I'm arguing that is not a particularly good idea to stage the acceptance speech this way, because it can make him look elitist or perhaps arrogant.  I'm not criticizing him for trying something different, but for this action, and solely from a political aspect.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Clearly this is going to be the #1 issue this election. Next Gallup poll will probably find that 30% of Americans consider Obama's elitism in holding his acceptance speech in a stadium the most important issue, beating out Iraq and the economy.

Who here argued that this would even be an issue? I know I'm not.

J. J.

Actually, I'm arguing that is not a particularly good idea to stage the acceptance speech this way, because it can make him look elitist or perhaps arrogant.  I'm not criticizing him for trying something different, but for this action, and solely from a political aspect.

So therefore, you're arguing people might actually change their votes on this, which is just idiotic

[Keystone Phil]

I'd be even more pissed off if our nominee (either this year or in the future) decided to do this. Should we move the inauguration to Giants Stadium while we're at it? Or how about the State of the Union in the Superdome? Being at the actual convention makes it something. This is just makes it seem like even more of a typical rally.

If George W. Bush had done this in 2004--and he could have--Republicans would have been cheering and feeling like winners, and with good reason.

I don't know how many times I've done this now but I will say it again - I have certainly criticized my party and candidates I support time and time again. I don't care what other people would have done. I don't even care that other Republicans don't like this thing Obama is doing.

[Brittain33]

I don't know how many times I've done this now but I will say it again - I have certainly criticized my party and candidates I support time and time again. I don't care what other people would have done. I don't even care that other Republicans don't like this thing Obama is doing.

Ok... personally I wouldn't have criticized the Republicans then or Obama now, and I don't think it would have made Bush look bad or elitist. He seems to have done well from cultivating an image of an adored leader addressing the masses, not elitist.

[Keystone Phil]

I don't know how many times I've done this now but I will say it again - I have certainly criticized my party and candidates I support time and time again. I don't care what other people would have done. I don't even care that other Republicans don't like this thing Obama is doing.

Ok... personally I wouldn't have criticized the Republicans then or Obama now, and I don't think it would have made Bush look bad or elitist. He seems to have done well from cultivating an image of an adored leader addressing the masses, not elitist.

This really isn't about elitism; it just seems so arrogant. Why isn't the convention hall good enough? I guess 20,000 people just isn't good enough.

I still don't think this is a genius campaign move. Appealing to big crowds on the campaign trail? Fine. Surrounding yourself with 100,000 people on national television seems to be overdoing it.

[Smash255]

I don't know how many times I've done this now but I will say it again - I have certainly criticized my party and candidates I support time and time again. I don't care what other people would have done. I don't even care that other Republicans don't like this thing Obama is doing.

Ok... personally I wouldn't have criticized the Republicans then or Obama now, and I don't think it would have made Bush look bad or elitist. He seems to have done well from cultivating an image of an adored leader addressing the masses, not elitist.

This really isn't about elitism; it just seems so arrogant. Why isn't the convention hall good enough? I guess 20,000 people just isn't good enough.

I still don't think this is a genius campaign move. Appealing to big crowds on the campaign trail? Fine. Surrounding yourself with 100,000 people on national television seems to be overdoing it.

If the deamnd to attend is as high as it is, if you have the opportunity to hold it in a place to help meet the larger demand, why not?

[Eleanor Martins]

The way I see it, the choice is between addressing a crowd of Beltway insiders against as close an approximation as possible of the popular masses. Which makes it an incredibly easy choice. I couldn't possibly comprehend why people would think extending political participation into the public at large away from the orgy that is D.C. and local party interests is a bad thing.

It would be great if McCain did this too.

[Keystone Phil]

If the deamnd to attend is as high as it is, if you have the opportunity to hold it in a place to help meet the larger demand, why not?

Ok, fine. Would you like the inauguration there as well?

[Alcon]

Ok, fine. Would you like the inauguration there as well?

Sure, why not?  I don't really see a reason to care.

[Keystone Phil]

Ok, fine. Would you like the inauguration there as well?

Sure, why not?  I don't really see a reason to care.

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

[Alcon]

Ok, fine. Would you like the inauguration there as well?

Sure, why not?  I don't really see a reason to care.

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

That's still not really answering my question.  It obviously pisses you off for an affirmative reason.  I doubt you normally get annoyed about "boat-floating" concerns.

[Keystone Phil]

Ok, fine. Would you like the inauguration there as well?

Sure, why not?  I don't really see a reason to care.

Whatever floats your boat, I guess.

That's still not really answering my question.  It obviously pisses you off for an affirmative reason.  I doubt you normally get annoyed about "boat-floating" concerns.

Uh...I can't tell if this is serious or not especially since you didn't really ask me a question.