Bethel Park for African Americans

[Hopes]

Don't kid yourselves. The economic collapse played a part in that McCain made stupid mistakes responding to the problem, but Palin helped solidify his demise. The woman was an imbecile or merely played an imbecile to attract the uneducated segment of the republican party.

Simetime, that's the case with every election. Don't discount Obama's success. Every major change needs a tipping point and that was McCain's contribution. The negatives thrown at Obama by the republicans moved the center towards Obama. The majority of the population didn't want to associate with the prejudice being slung around. (That's a good sign. As a society, we have a long way to go but the majority of the population is moving in the right direction. The rest will eventually die off and the remainder will learn to deal with it.)

Negative publicity alone didn't win Obama the presidency. The center won't throw a vote to just anyone like you imply. Obama has many great attributes as a leader that truly inspired the center. If Obama was incompetent, the center would have voted for McCain even if Palin had a centerfold in Playboy and McCain was wearing Depends diapers and a drooling onto a bib.

Matt, call me a liberal that doesn't listen to facts. I'm a registered Republican, but I'm also a coveted swing voter that helps Pennsylvania earn its place as a swing state. I know darn well why I voted for Obama. Hardline republicans and liberals can only pretend to know what swings the center.

[mattjd]

Originally Posted by Hopes

Don't kid yourselves. The economic collapse played a part in that McCain made stupid mistakes responding to the problem, but Palin helped solidify his demise.

But what facts do you have to back up this claim? The facts show that McCain actually pulled ahead of Obama after he picked Palin and he dropped when Lehman Bros collapsed and never was ahead again. Also, if Palin was an issue, why did McCain do worse than Bush in the middle of PA, the most rural/conservative areas of the state? These areas did not have huge turnouts and many polls suggested that they prefered Palin over McCain. Check out the changes in numbers from 04 to 08 with Lancaster and York counties. Plus, if your opinion was correct about Palin hurting him with conservatives, then this would fly in the face of traditional political views that people vote for the President, not VP. They don't usually care who the VP is. in 1988, Bush had a bum in Dan Quayle, but won easily. In 2008, Obama had gaffe-o-matic Biden, yet it didn't matter...because people vote based on the president, not VP. Again, the numbers across the board show that the areas that McCain lost ground, compared to Bush in 2004, was often in conservative areas that didn't think he was conservative enough, and it was the economy that did him in, Palin wasn't even an issue.

[bradjl2009]

Originally Posted by mattjd

He was actually ahead in the polls until Lehman Bros collapsed...he never recovered. But don't mention this to anyone else. Facts and liberals go together like oil and water.

I remember that. The sudden of crash gave Obama the victory and so far I'm happy with him.

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by mattjd

Plus, if your opinion was correct about Palin hurting him with conservatives, then this would fly in the face of traditional political views that people vote for the President, not VP. They don't usually care who the VP is.

I didnt say Palin hurt him with the conservatives. I'm talking about the center---swing voters.

I also acknowledged that the collapse of Lehman played a part---in that McCain's response to the crash concerned voters. As a fiscal conservative, I began to teeter on the fence at that point. McCain wasn't inspiring confidence.

VP was important in this race because McCain looked too darn old. That forced voters to care who the VP was. The more I saw of Palin the more frightened I became of the ticket. I was very uncomfortable with her publicly announcing, on a few different occassions, that she disagreed with McCain. How would that have translated in the Presidency? Just imagine McCain doesn't go to war and Palin says she disagrees or vice versa. Just think about that for a minute. Vice presidents are not supposed to undermine the presidency for good reason. We need leaders who are united, not two Mavericks who can't work together.

The negative publicity really solidified my decision. It was disgusting to watch those adds on television. Palin's remarks were out of line. But Obama handled it perfectly. He didn't resort to negative campaigning. He kept focusing on the issues. In a time of crisis, we needed a leader who could focus on the issues.

As for the conservatives in central PA having a low voter turnout, that just tells me that they lost confidence in McCain but refused to vote for Obama. They chose to stay home. You would have a valid argument if you referenced a traditionally liberal area with low voter turnout, but that didn't happen.

I didn't vote for Obama as a lesser of two evils. The circumstances allowed Obama's strengths to shine.

You can disagree, but you can't possibly know what inspired swing voters. I know why I voted for Obama. My swing voting friends felt the same.

[simetime]

Originally Posted by mattjd

But what facts do you have to back up this claim? The facts show that McCain actually pulled ahead of Obama after he picked Palin and he dropped when Lehman Bros collapsed and never was ahead again. Also, if Palin was an issue, why did McCain do worse than Bush in the middle of PA, the most rural/conservative areas of the state? These areas did not have huge turnouts and many polls suggested that they prefered Palin over McCain. Check out the changes in numbers from 04 to 08 with Lancaster and York counties. Plus, if your opinion was correct about Palin hurting him with conservatives, then this would fly in the face of traditional political views that people vote for the President, not VP. They don't usually care who the VP is. in 1988, Bush had a bum in Dan Quayle, but won easily. In 2008, Obama had gaffe-o-matic Biden, yet it didn't matter...because people vote based on the president, not VP. Again, the numbers across the board show that the areas that McCain lost ground, compared to Bush in 2004, was often in conservative areas that didn't think he was conservative enough, and it was the economy that did him in, Palin wasn't even an issue.

Matt, you have a point to some degree, but a contributing factor to the importance of the VP in this past election was Mcclain's age/health asnd the stupidity of the next in line.

[simetime]

Originally Posted by Hopes

I didnt say Palin hurt him with the conservatives. I'm talking about the center---swing voters.

I also acknowledged that the collapse of Lehman played a part---in that McCain's response to the crash concerned voters. As a fiscal conservative, I began to teeter on the fence at that point. McCain wasn't inspiring confidence.

VP was important in this race because McCain looked too darn old. That forced voters to care who the VP was. The more I saw of Palin the more frightened I became of the ticket. I was very uncomfortable with her publicly announcing, on a few different occassions, that she disagreed with McCain. How would that have translated in the Presidency? Just imagine McCain doesn't go to war and Palin says she disagrees or vice versa. Just think about that for a minute. Vice presidents are not supposed to undermine the presidency for good reason. We need leaders who are united, not two Mavericks who can't work together.

The negative publicity really solidified my decision. It was disgusting to watch those adds on television. Palin's remarks were out of line. But Obama handled it perfectly. He didn't resort to negative campaigning. He kept focusing on the issues. In a time of crisis, we needed a leader who could focus on the issues.

As for the conservatives in central PA having a low voter turnout, that just tells me that they lost confidence in McCain but refused to vote for Obama. They chose to stay home. You would have a valid argument if you referenced a traditionally liberal area with low voter turnout, but that didn't happen.

I didn't vote for Obama as a lesser of two evils. The circumstances allowed Obama's strengths to shine.

You can disagree, but you can't possibly know what inspired swing voters. I know why I voted for Obama. My swing voting friends felt the same.

Hopes, I'm not taking anything away from Obama, but given the lies/failures of the Republicants I think it would have been pretty hard for the Dems to lose this past election. They pretty much cleaned house the year before in the senate/House

[Hopes]

Originally Posted by simetime

Hopes, I'm not taking anything away from Obama, but given the lies/failures of the Republicants I think it would have been pretty hard for the Dems to lose this past election. They pretty much cleaned house the year before in the senate/House

As others pointed out, McCain was the favorite until the collapse, the more we saw Palin, and the negative campaigning. If those three things hadn't happened, it's likely that McCain would have won.

As for cleaning house, I have no idea how Bush won the second term. I'm still kicking myself for voting for him in the first term. To be honest, it wasn't a thought-out vote. Mine was merely a legacy vote; however, I was too young when Bush Sr. was president to really know anything about the man. I just didn't do my homework. Plus, I did't like Gore.

I tried to rectify things in the second term election, but Bush won AGAIN. I think I was just ahead of the crowd. It took everyone a little longer to realize and then they cleaned house.

I personally prefer a democratic president and a republican majority in the house and senate. I like the balance, and it seems to work better than a Republican president with a democratic majority. I'm not comfortable with full party control of the democrats or the republicans. I'm glad the democrats weren't able to get enough majority to eliminate a filibuster.

I'll continue to swing my vote as any Perot voter would.

[Pghsucks]

Originally Posted by scottrpriester

Of course there are two sides to every story, and you did nothing to deserve this negative attetion, correct?

Scottrpriester,

I did absolutley nothing to deserve this negative attention. Geez, some people have a hard time believing that in 2009 there are people who are biased against another individual. I carry myself well, take care of myself and have no reason to steal. I make much more than the minimum wage that this individual earned I'm sure. Maybe my offense was that I chose to frequent a store that wasn't stereotypiically one frequented by black people. I don't know. I could go on and on to try to prove my point, but I would never make some of you see my point of view. That's fine. Everyone lives in their own reality. Take a look at some of the racist posts here on City Data. It's appalling and sad, but it is what it is. Some of you will see it and some of you won't. My sister warned me about this site so I am going to follow her advice and be gone from here. I have better things to do then to dialogue with perfect strangers in cyber space. To the original poster, I hope you find the information you were searching for.

[Dragondream]

my husband and I grew up in Uniontown, now live in Chicago, and are moving back to Pittsburgh in August! Good luck with your move!