Huckabee would still be in Texas attending covered-dish socials.

He's obviously going to get owned in a debate with Obama...he might as well run from all of them.

Just how long are the Republicans going to try and shield Palin from the American people? It's beyond pathetic at this point.

It's smart politics though I guess. She can't even manage a Katie Couric interview without sounding like a complete fool.


This woman has no clue. Maybe the Obama campaign could propose to swap the dates of Friday's Presidential debate with next Thursday's VP debate, it'd be interesting to see how the McCain campaign would respond at least.

No, but mainly because Huckabee and Romney aren't senators with a vote on the package.

I don't know if it's been mentioned before (I've missed some pages) but I thought it was an interesting point to be brought up since Palin gets all the heat for the flip flopping. Obama and Biden aren't any better concerning the same matter, and I still think Biden was a weak choice for Obama.

“I am calling on the President to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Barack Obama and myself,” Mr. McCain said in New York on Wednesday afternoon. “It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem.”

A short time later, Mr. Obama appeared at a news conference in Clearwater, Fla., and said that while he agreed “there are times for politics and there are times to rise above politics and do what’s right, ” he saw no need to cancel the debate, scheduled for Friday night at the University of Mississippi.

“This is exactly the time when people need to hear from the candidates,” he said.

He added: “Part of the president’s job is to deal with more than one thing at once. In my mind it’s more important than ever.”

Don't let what Obama says get in the way of your trolling eh?

Obama Rebuffs McCain on Debate Delay

Um... isn't Bucc right and Obama is basically doing nothing, or at least the same thing he planned to do?

Well, Bucc is also suggesting that Obama doesn't know what to do, so that's a little bit different.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

So because McCain wants to change the dates of the debates, perhaps so there is no VP debate (hmmm, now why is that) Obama needs to 'change' or else he isnt a 'change agent'.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

In wrestling terms.. this is called heel heat. John McCain is standing in the center of the ring, daring Barack to come out, saying he'll rip him apart..

When Barack steps into the ring.. McCain quickly steps out..saying "I'll deal with you at the pay-per-view (the election)"

Learned the tactic from Larry Zybysko, I bet :)

Well, I think that was just a bit of humor embellishment (as he did with the McCain side... remember he didn't just do the Obama side). Though I wouldn't blame Obama if earlier when the news came out he didn't know what to do immediately... I wouldn't (I'd be like, 'what did he say?!')

You honestly believe that McCain is trying to avoid putting Palin in a debate against Joe Biden?

Explain to me, please, what exactly is McCain doing in Washington at 9:30pm on Friday night to stop him from debating?

Do you honestly believe they chose that date for the reschedule, arbitrarily?

Of course not. Some are insinuating that the Republicans are scared to death of seeing Palin debating Biden. I think those people are severely overestimating Biden.

That's why I don't debate anymore here, the Obama fanatics are sooooo humorless and way too sensitive. :)

You don't think he could be helping hammering out the language? After all, he is the de facto leader of the Republicans right now (a lot of Republicans really aren't that great of fans of the Bush administration's plan).

Having listened to the various spins on this while out & about this evening, I'm a little disappointed not to have heard what seemed like the most obvious reality in the whole suspend/don't suspend mini-tempest.

Whether I believe that's his motivation or not, there is at least reason to think that McCain might be of some use in negotiating a compromise. Hell, his willingness to bend when I don't believe he should is one of the things I dislike about him most and he has played that role at times in the past (reportedly, I'm not in the meetings so I can't claim to know first hand with 100% certainty). Obama meanwhile has done little except run for President since reaching the Senate. He'd be as useful in this situation as tits on a boar.

The positions both are taking seem to make a certain amount of sense to me when you consider their relative positions in Congress.

And speaking of things I figured were beyond obvious (as I was in a post before this one) ... it isn't 930pm Friday that would be the problem with the debate, it would be the time not spent prepping for the debate while doing, you know, what a Senator should be doing such as participating in Senate business.

:eek:

Earlier this week:

http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/12288...todayinfinance



So perhaps McCain is needed back in Washington, according to Harry Reid at least.

This wouldn't get done without him? For two hours on Friday, night? You've got a lot of confidence in McCain, I see.

He, miraculously, figured this out 2 days before the debate, and since he hadn't attended a senate session since April, and while he's taking a major hit in the polls.


You can't bullshit, a bullshitter.

Apparently Harry Reid does as well (see above).

And are you forgetting to factor in a plane ride and all that it takes to get ready for a debate which is almost hundreds of miles from DC?

so move the debate to Washington DC.. hell.. clear out the Senate and have the debate there.

Didn't know he had to be in Washington to show his support. Especially, since he hasn't been there is so long.

That's like a 2-hour flight, not including time-zone changes. I see, McCain supporters are also grasping for straws. This is political move plain and simple.

Um... obviously he doesn't support the bill as originally presented. So what, you want him to just say "I don't like it" and let it die?

Earlier I heard those comments mentioned ... and in the body of the same story heard where Reid & Pelosi were busy drafting comments to the contrary.

Probably not much of a flip-flop penalty when you're Reid though.

It left me wondering whether Reid was actually trying to set a trap for McCain with the original remarks, hoping that McCain would be foolish enough to show up for a debate unprepared or if for a brief moment honesty overrode his partisanship and he spoke without thinking of the potential consequences ... or even if for some bizarro universe reason he knew exactly what he was saying and was setting Obama up to look bad by failing to do likewise.

I can see it now, McCain wins in November and sometime around Obama's concession speech a smiling Reid rips off his shirt to reveal a "Clinton in '12" t-shirt :D

No, I think they are estimating Palin. It is not that Biden is going to look great. I think it seems the McCain people don't think Palin can be ready by then. It is so easily apparent that you'd have to blind not see this for what it is. Let's go back to the campain offices...

McCain adviser: John, we are in trouble. Palin having real problems keeping the basic facts we are covering with her straight, and is not doing a very good job thinking on her feet. She'll not be ready next week.
McCain: Well, that's not good. How's our poll numbers?
McCain advisor: You might want to sit down for this....
McCain: Well, what can we do? Do we have the money to go real aggressive on TV ads to try to improve our numbers?
Advisor: No, sir. If we spend more now, we are going to be broke by the end of October.
McCain: Hmmmmm....what can we do to get good press and save money?




Obama Advisor: McCain suspending his campain and pulling all his tv adds. He wants to move the debate to next week and put off the VP debate.
Obama: Really? Crazy. How's our numbers.
Advisor: Going up.
Obama: Well, we'd be idiots not to take advantage of this and keep campaigning, right?
Advisor: Yes, sir. Full steam ahead.


BTW, why else in the heck would you pull TV ads unless you're worried about the money? It's not like McCain makes them, buys the time, and puts them on the air. It makes no sense at all.

Er, Flasch seems to have psychic abilities:

Link: CNN: McCain Camp to Propose Postponing VP Debate

Full Text:

And this just in from Barney Frank on MSNBC:

Ummm....actually he doesn't.

Reid to McCain: Don't Come Back to Capitol

September 24, 2008 5:14 PM
A Democrat tells ABC News that, in a phone call late this afternoon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., told Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that it would NOT be helpful for him to come back to Washington, D.C., to work on the Wall Street bailout bill.
McCain this afternoon suspended his campaign and said he would skip the first presidential debate in order to return to Capitol Hill to work on the log-jammed Bush administration legislation, which, as of Wednesday afternoon, was in peril.
McCain had phoned Reid to ask about the prospects of him, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., and others to sit down and work together on hammering out a bipartisan proposal.
"Sorry," Reid said to him, a Democrat close to Reid says.
Reid then read McCain the statement he had just put out: "This is a critical time for our country," says the Reid statement. "While I appreciate that both candidates have signaled their willingness to help, Congress and the administration have a process in place to reach a solution to this unprecedented financial crisis. I understand that the candidates are putting together a joint statement at Sen. Obama’s suggestion. But it would not be helpful at this time to have them come back during these negotiations and risk injecting presidential politics into this process or distract important talks about the future of our nation’s economy. If that changes, we will call upon them. We need leadership; not a campaign photo op. If there were ever a time for both candidates to hold a debate before the American people about this serious challenge, it is now.”
A source close to Reid said McCain didn't have much to say after that. Reid, the source says, thinks McCain's maneuver is a gimmick born from bad poll numbers and the fact that "debate prep must not be going very well."
- jpt
UPDATE: McCain senior adviser Mark Salter emails: "Yesterday, Harry Reid said that consensus couldn't be achieved without John McCain's leadership. John stepped up and is providing that leadership. Now Senator Reid seems to have changed his mind for reasons we'll let him explain. But what he should understand is that this isn't about Harry Reid or John McCain or Barack Obama. It's about the American people and, in the words of Warren Buffet, the financial Pearl Harbor they're facing. John's committed to doing his part to help avert that calamity. We hope Senator Reid is too."

That just makes Reid looking like he's playing politics... first saying Republicans would defer to him and then saying, oh no, please don't come back!

You know like JIMG already discussed a few posts up (the Reid having a Hillary '12 shirt comment).

ew good one although, it more like he stepped out of the ring and said, "I have more important things to deal with and will get at you later. Oh and that match between our managers? Well we might not have enough time for that to happen now."

So, McCain, in dropping everything to deal with the financial crisis, does a Curic interview, meets with the British supporter, and will stick around until tomorrow in New York to address Clinton's little shindig.

SI

I heard that Obama said today in a speech that what kind of president can't do more than one thing at a time? This si going to boomerang right back at McCain as nothing more than being afraid of debating Obama whether true or not. And anyone here or anywhere's else who thinks the Republican's aren't afraid to have Sarah debate ANYONE is a bigger for than she is. I mean God they won't even let her answer a question from the media unless setup three weeks in advance.:lol:

Brilliant :D

SI

Oops. McCain's spokesperson in Colorado accidentally emailed out the campaign's internal talking points about the suspension to the media.

Colorado Independent » Oops! Colorado McCain camp sends internal e-mail to reporters

That was exactly what I was thinking. It would be a great tactical move by the Obama team, since Biden doesn't really need any prep on the issues aside from having someone hit him repeatedly with a mallet that says "Don't say anything stupid, you idiot!" on it, while from all accounts Sarah Palin is still having trouble identifying the location of Russia's capital.

Yes. If not, they should be. And it doesn't matter if she's debating Biden or a tree stump, it's obvious that she's an idiot.

YouTube - CBS Sarah Palin interview

Well, that's one way of getting the key points to the media I guess.

It's sooo scandalous.

I can't believe people think this was an accident. McCain is simply playing the media to run with his own talking points. By making it seem like a "mistake", McCain just got gleeful liberals to repeat his talking points for 48 hours - somehow thinking they are hurting him ;)

As to the debate, I think it's a wise move for McCain. They will not get postponed, the democrats would storm the capital with torches as they all feel Obama will roll him. He makes it look like both him and Palin aren't ready (also postponing the VP debate) - which once again sets up the low expectations gambit. Then, he will reluctantly take the debate, appear very statesmen-like while Obama ends up looking like the eager politician more interesting in gaining an advantage in the election than helping the country.

Jeez, I'm still amazed at how the media (and many in this thread) have been played like a fiddle by McCain the past 2-3 months. But, if it ain't broke, don't fix it...

you know we're in the opposite sketches (YCDTOTV reference) when the Democrats are frantically trying to slash down the amount of a handout, and the Republicans are trying to inflate it.

I think you're seeing things differently then most everyone else sees it. The problem with having constant low expectations is.. well.. if you never progress to having higher expectations, then you generally lose.

Interesting..

CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - CNN confirms: McCain, Obama to meet with Bush about bailout « - Blogs from CNN.com

Bush asked McCain and Obama to come to the White House to fix this and, Obama has accepted! Of course, one could say that Bush is in on this to help McCain (I think Bush thinks he can save his own legacy, but whatever).

Well, not always (2000 & 2004, and in some respects 1980).

I guess if he was doing this for the good of the country in a non-partisan way, then why the need for distributed talking points?

I think both Palin and McCain will exceed their low expectations in the debate and have higher expectations. They've just been playing that hand longer than I thought was possible.

I'm not sure what is more scary...you making a YCDTOTV reference or me not even having to do a double-take on the acronym. Hopefully I'm not the only one.

would you possibly think anything else? this page of the thread is a massive lesson on how badly Arles is spun.


LOLLERS, McCain stood Letterman up and who did Letterman get instead: Keith Olberman. Must see TV.

Talking points are simply summaries for his supporters to use when discussing why HE wants to do this. Given no one can get inside of McCain's head, it's usually a good idea for a candidate to supply them to make sure those who represent them know why he's doing something.

The genius in it is calling the memo "Talking Points", which makes it seem much more insidious. Instead, if you actually read the memo, it makes McCain look very good. So, because of the scandalous title, the media will be stating that McCain was secretly hoping to "suspend advertising and fundraising" to instead try to help with this crisis.

Sure paints him in a bad light, doesn't it?

And what in the world do you think that you are any different??? I see no difference between you and JonInMiddleGA.

"Daaaahahhhhh... I heard that!"



(hope this site doesn't have an anti-hotlinking policy)

Now THAT is funny.

Hey Jon! Joo hear that? I wasnt even talking about choo. LOL

Oh and BTW, McCain told a bold faced lie when he told Letterman he wasnt in NY and Letterman showed the feed of Johnny Mac taping his interview with Couric. So perhaps he just forgot he was in NY or he told a bold faced lie. y'know....I dont like lying, nope, not at all.

McCain hasn't made a vote since April, suddenly he's all about the business of the Senate?

So, stating that McCain is "spinning" the media and this thread shows how "spun" I am. I am not sure that even makes sense, but I'll repost what Kodos linked to earlier to help explain all this:

Yep, but he'll keep insisting that he's seeing both sides, blah, blah.

He had plenty of time today to meet with Rothschild and plenty of time tomorrow to give a speech at Clinton's global warming event.

Would you agree with the premise that the banking crisis is slightly more important than whether or not spotted owls need protection in northwestern Oregon?

yes

Would you admit that McCain lied about his location today?

BTW, this may be a fun game.

I did read it. And several of the points brought up in it are wrong. Obama contacted the McCain campaign that morning, not the other way around. And it was the Bush administration that invited Obama to the discussions, not the McCain campaign.

Take into account that McCain hasn't voted on a Senate measure since April Votes by John McCain | Congress votes database | washingtonpost.com , it seems a little bit of a stretch that now all of a sudden nothing can get done on the bailout unless he drops everything and heads back to Washington.

Or is his lack of voting yet another master plan that is playing the public and the media like a fiddle?

YouTube - David Letterman Reacts to John McCain Suspending Campaign

For anyone who doesn't feel like waiting/staying up lateish.

Letterman was on fire.

Well it's just a Hollywood type. him speaking out is probably good for McCain, sympathy wise, i mean. right? Well Letterman's just full of shit. That CBS feed was from a few days ago and the Senator wasn't ever scheduled to be on. It's just a vast Liberal Media bias playing out. And that wasn't even the real McCain over there on Couric's show because we all know that Johnny wouldve never let someone apply makeup, that makeup tech wouldve walked away with 2 broken arms and a limp....bloody.

Mizzou Basketball, Arles, and JoninGA make no bones about what side they are on. Only Mizzou even tries to act like he has no bias. You are clearly a Democratic schill but think the rest of us don't realize it because you end every post with "I would be pissed at Democrats too". So either you are a complete fool and really think we believe you or you are in complete denial yourself and really don't see how slanted your posts are. You are 100% Democrat and your posts never show anything otherwise. That's not a bad thing, but you make it bad by claiming you are fair and balanced.

k

Hell, Andrew Sullivan mocked McCain for saying he was locked up with his advisors all morning, when it came out that he spent most of the morning with Lady Rothschild...

Today has not been a good day for the truth.

SurveyUSA has put up a "snap reaction" poll to the whole debate postponement controversy.


link to all questions and data

(No idea if what he says is right - it probably is,) but Andrew Sullivan has been anti-Republican for about 4 years if you're trying to imply some intra-Party mockery.

He's kinda the opposite of Christopher Hitchens in that their current positions and fetishes are completely at odds with the labels they're popularly known as. (With the caveat that Hitchens is a complete badass who could outdrink Sullivan (and all of FOFC) and probably does most nights before debating his opponents.)

I have to admit, my interest in Friday's debate is about triple it was before. It looks like something will get done tomorrow (something very doubtful 24 hours ago) and that should help McCain. It will be "spun" (for Flasch) that McCain's ultimatum on the debates may very well have increased the willingness to get the bill done.

Now, do I believe that? I think it's a stretch. But, I think McCain is better off for pulling this stunt today which might be what matters in the campaign. In the end, I don't think it will matter much but it's been fun to watch.

As I suspected, there wasn't a peep from most of the news outlets on this today. Can you imagine what would have happened if Sarah Palin had said the exact same thing that Biden said? It would have been hammered ad nauseum for days on CNN, MSNBC, "The View", Letterman, Jay Leno and SNL.

I am dying to ask Biden to spell "potatoes".

The only person I saw hammer it was Jon Stewart.

Yup. It is really a pretty sad statement. FDR went on TV during the Great Depression? Wow. So much wrong in one little statement.

Good article on how this whole bail-out is a bit of a catch-22 for McCain:

First thoughts on McCain’s call to delay presidential debates

Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 03:17 PM
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Republican John McCain says he’s directed his staff to work with Barack Obama’s campaign and the presidential debate commission to delay Friday’s debate — because of the economic crisis.
Read the building story here.
“It has become clear that no consensus has developed to support the administration’s proposal,” McCain said. “I do not believe that the plan on the table will pass as it currently stands, and we are running out of time,” McCain said.
Not to be too cynical, but here’s McCain’s dilemma:
Yes, the topic of Friday’s debate is national security, as many of you have pointed out. But given the attention that the Wall Street situation has earned, it would be unrealistic not to expect the two candidates to be questioned about it. At some point, the economy is a national security issue.
Opposition is building among conservative Republicans to a federal bailout. Newt Gingrich is among the leaders. See a previous post here.
Remember that Vice President Dick Cheney was given an earful by the House GOP caucus on Tuesday when he tried to sell the Bush package. Georgia GOP members are among the skeptical.
Presume that Democrats, because they control Congress, will get the protections they deem necessary to earn their approval. For instance, the New York Times is reporting that the Bush Administration is now willing to concede the issue of limits on executive pay.
But Republican qualms are ideologically based, and unlikely to be satisfied.
Should McCain endorse the package — as U.S. senators, both he and Obama will be asked to vote on it — then the Republican risks alienating a GOP base that was just won back by the nomination of Sarah Palin as vice president.
Vote against it, and McCain chances giving Obama the most important issue of the campaign.
CNN and ABC News is reporting that Obama is less than inclined to postpone the debate.

I'm sure that's all they've voted on since April. Good argument.

Because give or take at least half the country is too f'n stupid to tie their own shoes? And believe me, "half" is being far more generous than I really believe. You want to get an idea across to the masses, you better be able to boil it down to a few points on about a 3rd to 5th grade level or you're SOL.

Along with that cheery thought, re: the USA Today poll on debategate reaction, it'll be interesting to see what the final combined rating for the debate turns out to be. And then of that number, how many do you believe will actually have their vote influenced by anything that happens in the debate?

How about the G.I. Bill?

Besides, McCain's a self-professed non-expert on the economy. He holds no positions on the relevant committees. What, exactly, is he going to add to the drafting of such a bill?

It makes Biden look more like a regular joe, you know, somebody you could have a beer with. Contrast that to an elitist rock star celebrity candidate like Sarah Palin who would probably be too busy traveling around the country meeting the likes of Bono. That just doesn't connect to my small-town, blue-collar values.

Palin being interviewed by Katie Couric: Cringeworthy.

Just... wow.

Heh, just watched the SNL Tina Fey-as-Sarah Palin skit. I'd bet good money Fey would have done better in that interview than Palin. :D

I agree with you but like Obama, when you get an aura of being a 'rock star' youre treated differently. Biden and McCain arent thought of in that way, IMO.

Indeed he was:

Joe Versus the Volcano | The Daily Show | Comedy Central

Uhhhhh, I've stated that I'm a moderate Republican (read: don't believe a word of the moral right, but I'm very conservative on economic policy) and have said that I'm probably going to vote McCain. I think that's a pretty clear indication of where my bias lies.

I think that continues to be one of the main differences between the two sides. The general conservatives don't try to hide in any way what their leanings are, whereas posters like Flasch and JPhillips who have obvious leanings indirectly talk out of one side of their mouth about the virtues of liberal policy while preaching an 'unbias' search for the truth out of the other side. Someone needs to tell them that "Don't ask, don't tell" applies to gays, not liberals. It's OK to come out of the closet.

FWIW.....I think the McCain move is mostly political maneuvering, but the Obama camp needs to maintain their focus on the issues. Oh, and they need to tell Harry Reid to shut the hell up before he f#@$s up Obama's plan to handle this situation. Unbelievable.

Amazing contrast in interviews by Katy Couric. She had the flamethrower out for Palin. I'd note that there's nothing inherently wrong with putting Palin's feet to the fire. Voters need to see how she handles the situation. With that said, where were the similar questions when Biden was interviewed earlier this month? It was blatently obvious what was going on to anyone who watched both of those interviews.

I don't try to hide my beliefs, I just expect people to have evidence before stating "facts" and that they hold their side to the same standard as their opponent.

As for Katie Couric, seriously when did all the Republicans become such whiny pussies? Katie Couric is too mean for an interview? All you need now is for Harry Smith to bring out the flamethrower and you'll be 0-3 with former morning show anchors. Who would be an acceptable interviewer, Mike Greenberg?

And Dan Rather thought he & his cronies represented "the center". This really isn't anything new.

I noticed you didn't address the creampuffs that she tossed Biden. There were certainly plenty of lobbying issues related to his son along with his numerous 'Biden' moment where she could have taken him to task, but that obviously wasn't in the cards.

I suppose that name-calling is now a full representation of the 'facts' in the discussion. Well done.

What were the tough questions she asked Palin? What was out of bounds? What I saw was a pretty soft interview, but one where Palin couldn't provide the boilerplate answers that should be second nature for a VP candidate. It isn't Katie Couric's fault if Palin is laughably unprepared for a simple interview.

Just so I can keep my fantasy team up to date, was Couric meaner than Gibson?

I think the expectations angle hasn't been played up enough on this. I think you hit the nail right on the head. We've been talking about this for a while (the line about Grandpa Simpson vs Denzel Washington comes to mind) and debates are all about expectations. This just lowers the bar a little more for McCain.

SI

I'm not so sure this will affect the campaign in any way, but just another perfect example of what stupid sounds like.......

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Alcee Hastings: Anyone who hunts moose “don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks”

I really like Joe Biden but he does have foot-in-mouth syndrome sometimes. And, yes, Jon Stewart did go after him last night but that's not exactly the news media.

SI

Those mean reporters are making Sarah Palin look bad!

:cry:

First, as you appear to be confused, the argument is not that the Palin interview was unfair in any way. The argument is that the quality of questions in the Biden interview wasn't even remotely as good or tough as the Palin questions. Biden got a free pass and I'm sure he was happy about it.

Here's the lists of questions that were asked of Palin and Biden. While I am certainly under no illusion that JPhillips will yield any sort of ground in admitting the obvious difference in tone between these two articles and how different the results would have been if the questions for each candidate would have been, I certainly think the comparison is worth the time for those that are interested.

First, the Palin interview.........

One-On-One With Sarah Palin, CBS Evening News Anchor Katie Couric Interviews Alaska's Governor On The Ailing Economy - CBS News


Next, the Biden interview.........

Behind The Scenes With Joe Biden, CBS News Anchor Katie Couric Spends The Day With The Democratic VP Nominee - CBS News

I'm genuinely curious as to how anyone can be very conservative on economic policy AND a Republican. I'm assuming no one who's economically conservative was ever a Democrat.

Cause they remember Dole and the Contract with America Republicans. Wasn't too long ago.

Simply put, I don't believe in government handouts or income redistribution. I'm a big fan of the flat tax with no exceptions/loopholes. That includes a full revoking of the estate tax. Most all of those issues lie on the conservative side of the line, so I generally support the Republican candidates more often than not.

So how would you classify the prescription drug benefit and current finance bailout? That's explicit income redistribution right there.

I'm not a supporter of either of them. In the long term, both of them help the wealthier class rather than the average citizen IMO.

Stereotypes are just easier and save everyone time!

OK last question :) If Republicans led and did these things that you're against (and IMO they're really BIG things), why support them with your vote? NOT arguing that the Dems are better, worse or indifferent, but if you support someone who says they believe in X and then goes and does the opposite, that seems like the worst of both worlds.

Well, if I used that logic to vote, I wouldn't vote for anyone. :)

My assumption is that most voters vote based on which candidate offers the most benefit to them as an individual. In my case, I align much more with the Republican way of thinking rather than Democrats.