Hey Mike,

>Quite a difference between Dean and Obama. Obama won the nomination, overcoming a presumptive nominee and practically the entire party apparatus initially arrayed against him.

Yes. The Net-based roots were all for Dean but that couldn't help him when the general Democratic fold decided to tack centrist. Honestly, I still don't know how Hillary lost this one and I think it'll take some time and analysis by folks way more astute than me to figure that one out as well.

>Obama is no more liberal than McCain is conservative. They are both tacking to the center, as all candidates do.

Didn't I say that? But who is the most believable as a centrist?

>I was going to decline the bet, then just thought of one that might be kind of fun. How about this? -- if McCain wins, the day after election day I will wear (all day!) a shirt that says "John Koziol is smarter than me." And if Obama wins, you will do the same except the shirt will say "Mike Beane is smarter than me." Deal?
>

Deal! Whomever loses must wear the shirt and post a pic here on the UT! Bet on!

>>Yeah, and Howard Dean was unstoppable in the 2004 primaries until the Dem moderates leaped in and then he was toast.
>>
>>Obama comes from a far-left background. Yes, he is attempting to go centrist with his position changes. But that's not him and it'll show as time goes on. McCain is an "everyman" and, for the most part, doesn't have to mask himself. I believe that as more Americans are sucked into the process that they are going to go for the more moderate - which is McCain. Wanna bet money?
>>
>>>McCain has crept back into striking range in the most recent polls and now you're saying he will trounce Obama. Amazing what we can "see" when we put our minds to it.
>>>
>>>>Not to beat the "I told you so" drum too loudly, I've said all along that the minute McCain and Obama went head to head Obama would suffer and that's what happened Saturday at Rick Warren's affair. Until now I think that Obama has been riding the coattails of folks who were/are frustrated with the government and really want change. But now that the election is nearing and people are examining him they are starting to realize that his type of change is unpalatable and that he's becoming inscrutable with his constant position changes and nuanced answers.
>>>>
>>>>The thing is, risking repeating myself, is that unless you are a knee-jerk Democrat/liberal, it would have to bother you that Obama has little to no relevent experience in running a government. A "rookie" as you put it. I would have the same visceral reaction against, say, Bobby Jindal if he were the GOP nominee for the same reasons.
>>>>
>>>>I've said it before and I'll say it again: When moderate Americans start paying close attention to the election Obama will fade away and get trounced by McCain because your typical American is center-right and doesn't like leftists.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Yep, I think the fact that Obama is a position shifter - du juor - is his biggest negative. I noted that his negatives have grown about 10 points in the past few weeks, and his positives have fallen a like amount. For Tracy, she said she was more concerned about the Iraq issue, and therefore that was her biggest issue, and now I guess she thinks everything is hunkey-dorey. Tracy, have you been hearing anything about that old Russian Bear lately? We cannot afford to have a rookie in the Oval office, especially one who doesn't have any core values. We need a strong leader.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Good points.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Here's my take: If we had two open, principled candidates then I would also be looking at a hard choice. But we don't. As much as the Democrats and leftists embrace Obama it is clear to me that he has lots of skeletons in the closet and he is willing to shift his stated position on a dime for political expediency. Not to say that McCain doesn't do that either, but not as starkly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Obama is "change, change, change". Excuse me, I want a clear-cut definition of what that change is. If I base that on his record as an Illionois state senator and his writings as a professor I absolutely don't want that change. OTOH, McCain is the GOP maverick who pretty much says what he means and means what he says and the absolute worse fault I can find with him is that he might be willing to bend to bipartisanship.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>There are folks who will vote for Obama no matter what; the guy could sprout horns and adopt the name "Damien" and libs like Tamar would vote for him anyway. I can't - I see disaster with a House run by Pelosi, a Senate run by Reid, and a Presidency run by Obama. Here comes higher taxes, the nanny state, the Fairness Doctrine, and other infringements on basic freedoms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I'm actually a little disappointed in this thread.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>From its title I at first assumed there was some late-breaking news that McCain had announced he was gay.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Now *that* would have made the dynamics of this election *really* interesting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>For sure. FWIW, I read the thread title as the theory that McCain would drop out before the nomination coming true.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>But I like the news that Tracy won't vote for him much better (whether or not she votes for Obama).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Tamar
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>:o)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I am really torn on this. I discussed it with my daughter and there is no easy answer. Typically I agree with about 50% of each candidate's policies anyway, so I have to choose which policies I feel are most important. Even then you run the risk that reality in office is nothing like promises made during the election. There are a couple issues though that I feel passionate about it, and this is one of them. It is one thing for a candidate to believe in overturning Roe v Wade personally but not making it a central point of their administration because the public wouldn't support the view. it is another thing to promise anti-abortion policies up front. It may be because I have an aunt who had a back alley abortion or because I also have an aunt who dissappeared for 9 months to have a baby or because I have another close relative who was the victim of rape. It is not a policy I am willing to let go though. A few months ago, when things were not going so well in Iraq, I felt
>>>that
>>>>>>>our responsibility there was more important than most other issues. I think we created a mess and have a responsibility to help the Iraqi people and clean it up (regardless of how we got there). Now that the situation has changed (and our troops are needed elsewhere), I can focus back on those issues that are dear to me.