Yuku free message boards

The other choices for McCain's pick weren't exciting. Romney was considered the front runner. He was 2nd in the primaries, but otherwise seems to bring nothing to the ticket. The other one, almost incomprehensibly enough, was Joe Lieberman. I had to look up whether he switched his party, because nationwide the thing he's most famous for is running as the VP candidate for Gore, a democrat. (It seems he has not shifted to being a republican, just an independent). I guess that could have strategic value -- Could that cause some democrats or liberals to vote for a republic president? Would it reinforce McCain's "maverick" status? (since he votes with Bush 95% of the time, he's been said to not be so much a maverick as a sidekick) I think it'd be more the latter than the former. It almost makes a weird bit of sense, since Lieberman has been accused of being Democrat in name only. Choosing him wouldn't win over any particularly liberal voters, I'd expect, but maybe it would win over some near-center voters who had been leaning left.



Anyway, it sounds like to the Republican true believers, the main thing about Palin is that she's expected to energize the evangelical vote. She's anti-abortion, and even just recently gave birth to a baby with Down's syndrome, after learning early in the pregnancy about the condition.

People need to learn how to have constructive conversations on the internet.

A conversation is like a chess match. In chess as in conversation, you have to take turns. Both can't go at the same time. And you don't know what the other person will do next. And you could potentially do any number of things You could move your rook, or your bishop. You could take the conversation seriously, or make a joke, or use an anecdote. You can't take back what you do. If you lose your queen, it's gone. If you offend the other person, they're not going to forget it even though you had the option previously of saying something else instead. And as all these options and responses continue throughout the game or the conversation, a huge elaborate tree of possibilities is imaginable.

But the main thing, the most important similarity, the thing that everyone should be aware of and work to improve on, is, YOU HAVE TO THINK AHEAD!!

In conversation, I'll add another thing, especially since conversation isn't competitive: You should give indications that you have thought ahead.

I'm getting tired of expounding on this analogy, but your first post gave no indication you thought about ANYTHING, or how you expected people might reply to it. It was completely vapid and without substance. You could have, at the very least, posted what you said in your second post right up front (she's anti-gay, etc.). That would have at least been thinking of the first move instead of the negative first one.

As for her being anti-gay, hey, I personally am not happy about that. But you specifically said "he shot himself in the foot" over it, meaning that it's not just your opinion, but that in the opinion of a clear majority of Americans it's a problem. That's something that needs evidence. 34 states out of 50 in America show up as solid red, orange or yellow on this map, meaning they have specifically outlawed gay marriages and rights, so regardless of what I, or you, or any other individual may think about gay marriage rights, opposing gay marriage seems to be a politically viable position.

And McCain might oppose a constitutional ban on same-sex marriages, but he supports states banning same sex marriages. It's not like adding Palin to the ticket radically changes their platform on that issue.

Yeah, I don't know what other people have suggested for possible female republican candidates with more experience, but I know I saw several, and Condi Rice was one. Although, regardless of her experience, she might have been skipped to avoid associations of Bush.