2008 US Election Thread

[chk hrd 164]

Good luck getting pharma caps in place. The costs associated with trials and FDA approval will make it cost prohibitive for the drug companies to bother coming up with new medicines.

not to mention all the money the lobbiest need to line pockets with

[chippa13 1844]

Compared to the costs of research, development, clinical trials, and FDA approval the lobbying money is a drop in the bucket. Any talk of capping pharma costs would have to go hand in hand with talks of extending patent limits.

[Jason Harris 31]

That is your deficit, not the debt.

I misunderstood the article to mean the debt had been $161 billion last year, to which a $246 billion deficit had been added, creating a new debt of $407 billion. But, you're right, this was just saying our budget deficit was $161 billion last year, yet grew to $407 billion this year.

I only have enough understanding of economics to be dangerous to myself, but the one thing I'm fairly certain of is the past 28 years have shown that the flow from trickle down economics dries up before it reaches the majority of us.

[gxc999 7]

Compared to the costs of research, development, clinical trials, and FDA approval the lobbying money is a drop in the bucket. Any talk of capping pharma costs would have to go hand in hand with talks of extending patent limits.

The number one cost of Big Pharma is what? Anybody know? R&D, right? Wrong, it's advertising. I had an in-depth discussion with my allergist about it and we both said what a bunch of bs...

[Allsmokenopancake 0]

Compared to the costs of research, development, clinical trials, and FDA approval the lobbying money is a drop in the bucket. Any talk of capping pharma costs would have to go hand in hand with talks of extending patent limits.

Most R&D is actually done by the CDC and the pharma companies take research and refine it, the R&D buget also includes marketing for these companies.

Go look up Prilosec OTC and Nexium for a lovely cheerful slice of what pharma companies are doing to the american public

[Gwyren 0]

Good luck getting pharma caps in place. The costs associated with trials and FDA approval will make it cost prohibitive for the drug companies to bother coming up with new medicines.

I would give more credence to this if drug costs were higher elsewhere in the industrialized world. Price caps or not elsewhere, NO country wants to see big pharma disappear. But the US should not be used as the cash cow to fund drug development for everyone.

[JR Boucicaut 3802]

And she speaks...

...and she bombs.

[pantherfan 0]

As soon as I heard about all this Palin stuff, I instantly thought "OMG, whats Matt Damons view on all this?"

Well now you know. ;)

[troy 12]

Haha, why would he preface the video about his opinion on Palin by saying, "I don't know anything about her..".

[Jason Harris 31]

And she speaks...

...and she bombs.

After watching parts of her interview tonight, she struck me as being average. There are times we meet someone and think, "That person is sharp," but she comes across more like a hockey mom.

[gxc999 7]

Is anyone else scared by the prospect of her being acting President after McCain dies in office? It's insanity...

[Trooper 8]

She didn't bomb, Gibson did with his condescending attitude, especially the stupid "Bush doctrine" question. The more the media tries to "get her", the more the public is going to side with her. The interview was in start contrast to the batting practice questions Stephanopolous gave to Obama the other night, even correcting his misstatements for him.

[Jason Harris 31]

I partially agree.

The more the media tries to expose her, the more her core base will flank around to protect her, while letters to the editors, blogs, etc. have indicated the independent, undecideds have already started to question her seaworthiness as VP or potential President.

Regarding whether she bombed, I think it's fair to say this is a Pass/Fail course. The question is can people objectively scale her performance as Presidential? Unfortunately, it's obvious the hardest part is for people to be objective or even honest with themselves. In other words, in conjunction with what has already popped up in two weeks, how do you think most people on either side would view another unknown with such a performance if the unknown was a 55-year-old, dumpling of a woman?

I really don't think people would be getting nearly so many hard-ons for such a polarizing, dark horse candidate thrust into the spotlight with eight weeks to go -- and who gave a similar performance -- if she looked like Margaret Thatcher, but I'm only trying to be honest and objective here.

[Trooper 8]

Regarding whether she bombed, I think it's fair to say this is a Pass/Fail course. The question is can people objectively scale her performance as Presidential?

I can't really remember when the last time people really cared so much about a VP. Very few people will vote based on a VP candidate. What she did was stole air time from Obama. Politics aren't about issues as much as you'd think. It's a chess game. It's about framing the conversation. The Obama camp got completely outflanked by this choice.

[Jason Harris 31]

I agree that politics aren't about the issues, because it's a game to get elected, and we know that the the average American is poorly educated on the issues and often disinterested (voter turnout in the US since 1945 places it 139th in the world).

However, it's quite obvious why people have cared so much about a VP. Because the actuary tables say the chances of a 72-year-old man with three instances of cancer has a higher chance of becoming incapacitated within the next four years. Yes, I understand he will be afforded the best medical care/prevention in the world, but he'll also be subjected to one of the most demanding jobs in the world, so there's a far greater chance this VP becomes President than any recent VP candidate. Consequently, the McCain camp turned this into a question of whether people would be willing to vote for him -- and, by extension, her -- for President.

And that is why I disagree with you about the political genius of the move. McCain still trails Obama greatly in the electoral polls and I don't see those states voting for an inexperienced woman with quite conservative ideals being that close to being President.

[interpathway 9]

the story on raising hockey families in Alaska is almost as good as the action shot of the guy sporting his white 9ks

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/12/us/12hoc...amp;oref=slogin

[lampliter87 8]

Already posted:

http://www.modsquadhockey.com/forums/index...showtopic=42056

[Trooper 8]

And that is why I disagree with you about the political genius of the move. McCain still trails Obama greatly in the electoral polls and I don't see those states voting for an inexperienced woman with quite conservative ideals being that close to being President.

Before Palin the media was essentially Obama's personal message bearers. Post-Palin the coverage has evened out, at least as far as quantity. In that sense it was a great move. Biden is a non-factor, people don't get excited about him either way. As for her being that conservative, you have the choice of a conservative VP or one of the most liberal senators in the country as president.

And VoteFromAbroad.org has McCain up 270 to 268 in the EC, so that's currently a wash.

[Goonsquad 209]

<cue Funky music>

Bill Clinton on Palin: 'I get why she's hot out there'...

[Allsmokenopancake 0]

My only question is this.

If palin has the readyness to lead, and she won't blink (which is what she said to charlie charlie charlie charlie charlie gibson), then why won't she do the sunday shows?

Before her Gibson interview, her camp were saying Gibson was one of the most respected and fair broadcasters in the nation, and he would have no limits on his scope of questioning. Now, she won't do the live shows because the "media will try to ambush her"?

Really, Tom Brokaw is going to ambush her? He interviewed Biden a couple of weeks ago, and pressed him both on his support for Roe v Wade with him being a catholic, and on his son getting a $100+K job at a delaware banking institution that he passed favorable legislation for.

That's not ambushing, that's asking proper questions. She is going to be able to lead the USA if needed, but can't handle and interview with Bob freakin' Schieffer.

She was lobbed softballs by hannity.

I would like to hear her have to articulate her positions on the issues on Meet the Press or Face the Nation. The other 3 candidates have all done it. She will be asked tough questions, but she should be able to handle them.

There are so many stories coming from both sides on this candidate that until she actually shows she is a serious candidate and can speak like one, and not just a facade, then no one is any the wiser.

And it reflects poorly on peoples judgement of her. How can we decide if we can't ever hear her answer a question that's not (to paraphrase hannity) "lets talk about the economy, do you think obama unfairly attacked Senator McCain when he said the fundamentals of the economy were strong?"

That's not questions, that's just smoke blowing and arse licking

[mack 44]

I liked this little Democratic move:

Sources: Intense Pressure Led To Palin UN Snub

CBS 2 HD Has Learned Democrats Threatened To Attack Jewish Groups' Tax Exempt Status Over VP Nominee Invite

NEW YORK (CBS) ― Hillary Clinton won't be speaking at Monday's anti-Iran rally at the United Nations -- and neither will Republican Sarah Palin or any other politicians for that matter.

The reason? A heated behind the scenes tug-of-war.

Sources tell CBS 2 HD that a decision to disinvite Palin from the high profile rally after Clinton pulled out in a huff came as the result of intense pressure from Democrats.

"This is insulting. This is embarrassing, especially to Gov. Palin, to me and I think it should be to every single New Yorker," Assemblyman Dov Hikind, D-Brooklyn, told CBS 2 HD.

Sources say the axes were out for Palin as soon as Sen. Clinton pulled out because she did not want to attend the same event as the Republican vice presidential candidate.

"I have never seen such raw emotion -- on both sides," said someone close to the situation.

The groups sponsoring the rally against Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaking at the UN were reportedly told, "it could jeopardize their tax exempt status" if they had Palin and not Clinton or Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden on hand.

So all politicians were disinvited, most prominently, Palin.

"It's an absolute shame that this has happened," Hikind said. "To threaten organizations … to threaten the Conference of Presidents that if you don't withdraw the invitation to Gov. Palin we're going to look into your tax exempt status … that's McCarthyism."

Another Jewish group tried to step into the breach by inviting Palin to a different protest a day earlier.

"I'm absolutely appalled at the behavior of the Democrats," said Bob Kunst of Defenders.net. "I'm a Democrat and for the first time in my life I'm going to vote Republican. I can't take it anymore."

As for Sen. Clinton, she brushed right past CBS 2 HD's Lou Young when he tried to ask her about the issue on Thursday night.

Lou Young: "Were the organizers of Monday's rally right to depoliticize it?"

Clinton walked past Young, said "Thank you all very much" and started hugging people.

Clinton's people tell CBS 2 HD she intends to make some statement of support for the protestors. She is also expected to attack Ahmadinejad's pro-nuke, anti-Israel stance.

http://wcbstv.com/local/clinton.palin.event.2.821565.html

I can't imagine what would happen if Republicans did the same thing.

[TheBert 0]

^^^VICE Presidency^^^

Unless he knows something that the rest of us don't. In that case there are some guys with dark glasses and ear pieces that would like to have a conversation with him.

Just actuary tables that suggest McCain has a 1 in 3 chance of dying while in office. Validates why Palin is being closely scrutinized as a potential president.

[ponty 0]

Palin scares the crap out of me. Its not the lack of experience that bothers me its the outright lack of knowledge on certain subjects. Her latest interview was simply painful to watch.

I have already live through VP "potatoe" and I would rather not do that again!

[JR Boucicaut 3802]

Agreed - I cringed while watching her answer questions.

[ponty 0]

Agreed - I cringed while watching her answer questions.

The one thing missing from her answer about her international experience was staring the response with ... "This one time at band camp ..."

That being said I think we would all would have been much better off if McCain picked one of the usual suspects rather than Palin. Either person will be an upgrade over our current leader but Sarah is a big problem in my opinion.