Categorized | Election 2008, Opinion

30 Comments For This Post

1. Jon Goldsmith Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 7:53 pm

   Barack Obama won–hands down. His best moment was when he talked about healthcare. McCain went on to say that healthcare is a responsibility, almost implying that it is a burden. Obama clearly, concisely, and strongly stated that it was a natural right. He said that his mother shouldn’t have died at age 53 from cancer while fighting with insurance companies. This was his best moment of not only this debate, but also the last. He was great. CNN analysts, even the republican ones, favored Obama and the measured responses were heavily in his favor for the majority of the debate. Also, who does McCain think he is referring to Obama as “that one”–this guy’s a real jerk. And I think I speak for all Americans when I say we are sick of the constant rhetoric. Stop pandering to voters by telling them they are the best workers and most innovative people in the world–chances are, if that were true we wouldn’t be in the economic predicament that we are in right now.

2. Gabriel Rom Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 8:08 pm

   Best workers…no

   most innovative…maybe

   I found it incredibly frustrating on the lack of directness in either candidates answers. Hell, Brokaw asked a questions specifically asking for a yes or no answer, and Obama let loose a two minute polemic that addressed pretty much everything while saying pretty much nothing of substance, and McCain did the same, but atleast he gave us a resounding “maybe”.

3. Seth Braunstein Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 8:13 pm

   Overall Obama won the debate; he was in complete control and showed his superior intellect in the early topics over the struggling economy, and despite Mccain’s brief comeback according to most during foreign policy given his war experience he still did come close to Obama in outlining strategy or goals if elected

4. Matthew Crowley Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 8:21 pm

   Obama definitely won. I don’t see how people can still be undecided at this point–the candidates are so different. If people actually realize the issues they’ll realize what true camp their best interests lie in. I think most undecided people at this point are simply unwilling, or unable to understand the issues and are borderline ignorant. While I’d prefer that independent voters would support Obama, I would at least minimally hope that they have made up their minds at this point. No candidate is perfect, none of them will believe exactly what you believe–get over it! Sometimes candidates have to take stances on certain issues to gain constituency–but many of those controversial like the second amendment or abortion will never actually be ruled on.

5. Matt Spevack Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 8:41 pm

   My initial overall impression on this second presidential debate was that it was superfluous. We all know each candidate’s policies on the economy, foreign affairs, and domestic issues, so what was really at stake in this debate? Not much. Perhaps a possible McCain gaffe may slightly boost the polls for the democrats, and a mention of Obama’s affiliation with William Ayers might help the republicans, but really there weren’t too many votes to be won. However, as the debate ensued, a few slightly awkward attacks on senator Obama put McCain in a negative light (referring to Obama as “this one”), and turned the course of the debate in favor of Obama. As Obama stuck to the questions at hand, and veered away from verbal attacks, he was presented in a much more affable light on stage. Even their physical presence was “fundamentally different”. As McCain hobbled to his chair Obama strutted across the red carpet in style. Although issues on the economy remain vague and debatable, Obama did an excellent job of putting the pressure on McCain for his foreign policy efforts. Towards the end of the debate, McCain tried to criticize Obama for his inexperience and being “green behind the ears”. Using these attacks to his advantage, Obama made note of McCain saying “Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Bomb Iran” and “Next stop Baghdad” in order to present this McCain double standard, and in turn condemn McCain’s foreign policy strategy. Because of his strong finish, and McCain’s apparent lack of political class and debate etiquette, I give the win to Obama. This certainly wasn’t a game changer, but it also did not in any way solidify an Obama Biden White House.

   And by the way…Could they have possible picked more uneducated people to ask the senators their questions?

6. durbanlad Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 8:46 pm

   We just witnessed the end of Republican free-market economics. What’s J Mac thinking with that $300bn mortgage buyback bomb?! Hell, we’re supposed to be the party of smaller gov’t and individual responsibility. Next time he should let pitbull Palin loose on the effete community organizer from Chicago. Maybe then the country would see him for the tax-and-spend, American-doubting pol that he really is. But it’s too late. The con has worked – and I suspect that the continual tanking of the markets is the smart money’s way of saying, “Yikes! It looks like this guy is going to get the keys to the Treasury and the combo to the football. Time to head for the financial and military bunkers!”

   BTW: You kids who run this great website may just live long enough to see your 401(k)’s earn anough to allow you to retire. If not, think back on this campaign as the beginning of the end for the American dream.

7. Erica Boginsky Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 8:59 pm

   Both candidates performed at a surprisingly low- level this evening. Campaigning presidents were repeatedly scolded for talking out of turn, namely Obama. McCain surely did not forget to thank every person who asked him a question, at least twice. Obama rambled on for two-minute tangents accusing McCain of “lying,” and followed with “but you’re not interested in hearing politicians point fingers at each other.” Neither candidate was direct and by the end Brokaw’s frustration was palpable.

8. Max Godnick Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 9:08 pm

   Obama won the debate. Mccain looked like an aimless old man wandering around on stage. Everything he said, much like his running mate, seemed pre programmed and with secret motives.

   Granted, Obama had no shining moment securing a victory, and it would’ve taken something truly drastic (I mean fist fight drastic) to get this race off the track it is headed on.

   I have a feeling the next debate will be characterized in a similar way. However watch for Mccain to use his last opportunity to hit Obama on personality issues.

9. Max Godnick Says:
   October 7th, 2008 at 9:09 pm

   Also, Erica when was Obama scolded for talking out of turn?

10. Gabriel Rom Says:
    October 7th, 2008 at 9:13 pm

    politicians only give straight answers when explaining why their straight answers are never straight.

11. Jon Goldsmith Says:
    October 7th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

    I think Obama’s answer on healthcare was pretty straightforward.

12. Noam Dagan Says:
    October 7th, 2008 at 9:34 pm

    Obama won today not only on the issues, but regarding something I feel is crucial to his victory in November.
    Finally a democratic presidential candidate has displayed some semblance of aggression. What was most salient about this debate was that both candidates jabbed at eachother, often alluding to their opponents weaknesses or faulty proposals, but this was truly the first time I have seen a democrat respond with the same kind of intensity in personal attacks as Republicans have so easily displayed time and time again. Im sure most people would agree that such a discourse is unhealthy for our country and we should focus on the issues, and while I acknowledge that would be ideal, it is evident that that never works. If you recall Kerry was attacked on personal grounds in the 2004 election; even ones which we thought were taboo like his war record, and others that were just staggeringly irrelevant like that he was an elitist that was too intellectual to be in touch with the “real” American people, and that he looked too French. Now it seems that in the wake of our current economic crisis, Republicans have to resort to those same methods to attain victory, because Americans trust democrats more than they do Republicans on economic issues. Now, McCain and Palin are resorting to the old strategy of associating Obama with “domestic terrorists” like William Ayers and trying to portray him as a mysterious man, possibly with dubious motives. It’s obvious that the McCain campaign cannot win based on the issues, and now is when the election will get ugly. Judging from today, I believe that Obama wont just hide from ridiculous personal attacks and smear campaigning, and I hope he doesn’t replicate the shy indifference candidates like Kerry characterized when hit with outrageous attacks. The only way Obama can win is by resorting to those same tactics, after all;how else did Bush get elected twice? I don’t want to come across as an angry advocate for dirty politics and as some resentful democrat who hates Republicans just a little too much. After all, while I like Obama more than McCain I don’t consider him to be such a great candidate, perhaps just that he is a lot better than McCain. All I am trying to say is that it’s about time there is an angry democratic candidate, who is mad about the state America is in and who doesn’t appreciate Republican demagoguery. I just hope he doesn’t take the high road this time. I think it’s quite clear what most Americans vote on; nonsense.

13. Noam Dagan Says:
    October 7th, 2008 at 9:41 pm

    That might have been a bit long winded. In short, I think Obama won because he finally displayed some aggression.

14. Willy Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 8:57 am

    Max:

    I am not Erica but Obama was scolded several times as we McCain for long winded responses and not following the guidelines that were set up by both camps.

15. newspapertragedy Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 10:24 am

    Durbanlad,

    Not to seem impertinent, but why do you consider this a great website? Because it’s syncophantic? Currently, the leaning is very much to the left, so I must assume that is what you are applauding.

    As for the debate: Personally, I didn’t think either candidate won the debate. For the most part, they both just recited the same old campaign rhetoric that we have all heard before, and I don’t think either succeeded in making it any more convincing. As for each candidates performance, I think Erica sums up my thoughts well in her post below (and yes, Obama did talk out of turn more than McCain).

16. Jon Goldsmith Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

    To Mr. Newspapertragedy:

    While I have always been a proud democrat and Obama supporter, not all of us at the purple youth support or have supported Obama throughout the entire election. Even the conservative writers on this site have converted to blue because of either economic issues or fear that McCain’s number two is inadequate. We lean left sir, because currently, the right is wrong. Most of the nation is leaning left and I think I speak on behalf of all of us at TPY when I say that we mirror that trend.

    And let me remind you sir, that not all the people who have commented on this page are members of the purple youth, but in fact readers or just simply Americans who watched the debate. Nearly all members of this page are not directly affiliated with The Purple Youth. These comments lean left because the youth of america thinks Obama won the debate–regardless of color, party, or belief.

17. Gabriel Rom Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 3:08 pm

    Funny you say that Newspapertradedy, because as Durbanlad is a personal acquaintance of mine, I hate to tell you that’s hes a staunch conservative and will be voting for McCain this election.

    Your assumption that TPY can only be lauded based on its political leanings, rather than the level of discourse, whether it be liberal or conservative, is pretty damn ignorant.

    You really mean to tell me that the only way something can be great is if its philosophy (political or not) is parallel to your own?

    Additionally, I find it quite hard to believe that a website that has written an article entitled “The Case Against Obama” “leans very much to the left”. Before you politically typecast an entire website with a staff of many, at least read the rest of what we write.

    I would’ve thought a guy with such a impressive lexicon, would also harbor some good sense.
    - Gabriel Rom

18. durbanlad Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 3:45 pm

    AI consider it a great website for pretty much the same reasons the Managing Editor does: civil, impassioned and rational discourse. This is entirely consistent with their charter, and, in these poisonous political times, it is quite remarkable that these young men and women have created a forum that achieves these goals. When I compare this content with the bitterness and vileness of sites like MoveOn and The Puffington Host, and the partisanship of cable stations like MSNBC and CNN International, I am reassured that the future of our country is in good hands (although, as I suggest, they may not be as well off as their parents due to the damage I fear from the likely Democratic Executive and Legislative trifecta.

    Also, without being impertinent to you, it should have been clear that I am a Republican (clue: it’s my use of the 1st-person plural pronoun, “we”). Ergo, any charges of left-leaning bias on my part are unwarranted.

19. Jenn Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 4:04 pm

    WOW the youth just gets dumber and dumber.. How you all think Obama is so great is beyond me. The fact is that McCain is clearly the right choice for President. Why would anyone vote for someone with no experience and plans to mess up the country. The fat is if the Republicans were half as low as the democrats they’d attack back out and you’d all realize what a horrible choice Obama is. You need to really look at the issues, and realize how unqualified Obama is. Whether you like him or not he still isnt qualified to lead this country. I just dont get it..

20. Jon Goldsmith Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 5:06 pm

    Of course Jenn, we are the stupid ones. We are the ones who asked for a ten trillion dollar deficit and asked to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. We asked for an environmental crisis and an administration who didn’t believe global warming was real until after the 2004 election. We asked for a government to out undercover US spies. We asked for the Glass Stegal act to be repealed by veto-proof margins. We asked for the middle class to fail and oil companies to boom.

    Now let me tell you Jenn, I take offense to your comment. We are not stupid. The writers for this site attend one of the best schools in the country and all take advanced placement college courses in history and government. At the risk of sounding pretentious, I will say that we are highly educated individuals who haven’t been spoon fed opinions by the mass media; we actually think about the issues ourselves. You on the other hand, have clearly been spending too much time listening to the fear-mongering lies of Bill O’Reily. This isn’t the factor Jenn, people here actually know issues, and when we respond to people like you who insist on making their opinions without facts, you won’t simply be able to dodge our thoughts with a witty remark. We may be young, but dumb we are not. We are the future. And for the sake of that very future, I earnestly hope that sheep such as yourself are not part of our future.

    Before I tell you to look at the issues, I want you to understand just how hypocritical and just plain erroneous your statement is about democrats and Barack Obama. Your guy, Mr. Maverick, and Governor Palin refused to scold a supporter who called Obama a “terrorist” at one of their rallies. According to every major news source on the planet, McCain has stopped talking about the issues, because the fact is he cannot win on the issues anymore and is instead taking aim at Barack’s character–a truly noble act indeed. Even Karl Rove, let me say again… KARL ROVE, said that the McCain campaign was making lies up about Obama out of thin air. The RNC (that’s Republican National Committee in case you didn’t know what that stood for) has initiated an investigation over the Barack’s campaign finance–over what you might ask? Over the fact that a rumor has surfaced on extremely conservative blogs that Barack has taken money from foreign citizens. Do you actually not see past this ploy of trying to degrade Obama’s character with a phony investigation? Palin called Obama “palsy” with known terrorists. Let me just break down on a legal standpoint what this means she is accusing him of–she is encouraging and agreeing with the notion that Barack has committed treason by aiding and assisting an enemy of the state.

    Now if that’s not enough for you, on to the issues. McCain was a champion of deregulation, where did it lead us? Recession if not depression. And while the economic failures aren’t all republican’s or McCain and Bush’s faults, the fact remains: Republicans have championed deregulating the very system that FDR set up in the New Deal that set up the regulations that kept us out of a major financial crisis for the remainder of the 20th century. What could go wrong there you might ask? Well, buying on margins was one of the major causes of the last great depression, and probably this one. Savings banks invested share holders’ money in the stock market, and as the market crashed, the banks no longer had any money to guarantee that investors could get their cash back–as a result, banks failed, and people lost their lives. Barack warned about this years ago while McCain still said that deregulation was the way to go. I have news for you Jenn, if Bush’s society of Home Owners wasn’t so vigorously promoted, chances are we wouldn’t be in the debacle that we are in right now.

    Now, on to taxes. Another major cause of the great depression was the disparity between rich and poor. The middle class evaporated and the richest 1% of the nation owned close to 90% of the wealth. Today it is about 1%:80% of the wealth. And why could this be happening you ask? It’s because of Reaganomics. Let me tell you this–the trickle down effect does not work. It is an absolute failure. That money does not trickle down. And while your candidate continues to lie and suggest that Obama will raise taxes on all Americans, he will actually cut taxes by 95%. And to all those who say that Obama is going to increase government spending during a recession, that is completely true; what you fail to understand is that this strategy of combatting recession and depression is extremely potent. Keynesian economics encourage vast government spending and do you know why? Because if the government spends money on research and infrastructure it employs millions of people. FDR did it in the Civilian Conservation Corps and employed millions of Americans.

    Next up, energy. McCain has agreed to encourage corporations to voluntarily cut greenhouse gases and research cleaner technology. Has this ever, once worked in American history? Corporations cannot be trusted to do the right thing because a business is not moral. A business is a business and in a business only the bottom line matters. Obama will have us off fossil fuels in ten years. Do we really want more tax cuts for big oil so they can keep artificially inflating prices?

    And if you want to keep going, Barack is a brilliant man. He grew up on food stamps and attended the best schools in the world on scholarship (what an elitist, I know), while McCain on the other hand, graduated fifth from the bottom of his class at Annapolis.

    I could go on and on like this, trust me I could, but I think you should take a good minute Jenn, soak up the teachings of the “stupid” youth who you so clearly are superior to, and simply walk away with your tail tucked between your legs. It is clear to me you know absolutely nothing about the issues and have no true grounds for liking McCain. It is impossible Jenn, to prove to me or anyone on a historical or economical standpoint that deregulation, the trickle down effect, and more tax-cuts for the richest 1% are good things. You are wrong. Accept the fact that an adolescent, for lack of a better word, dominated your political intellect. I will gladly retract my judgments about you if you can prove to me that you actually understand the issues and can present to me clear and accurate reasons as to why to support McCain on the issues without the erroneous quip on “experience”. Then, at the very least, you will prove to me and every single young person you just insulted, that you are at the very least informed–instead of being misinformed and misguided.

    You are entitled to your opinions, but I ask you to withdraw your statements about myself and my generation. If we had any say in this, my grandchildren won’t be paying off three trillion in debt to the chinese over a bogus war.

    My intelligence and the intelligence of my fellow staff will not be questioned by someone such as the likes of you.

    You Ma’am, are officially on notice.

    Jon Goldsmith

21. Jenn Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 6:45 pm

    WOW too much time on your hands.. but i’m glad to see your not one of the dumb ones but a lot of people where i am are. They have no reason 4 voting 4 him besides the fact that he’s young. so you could see why i’d be frustrated. Im glad there’s some people like you who do look at the issues. I personally dont agree with Obama’s issues and i’m tired of everyone saying there voting for Obama because he’s young. The war and everything is a different story because McCain isn’t Bush.

22. Jon Goldsmith Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 7:10 pm

    I’m just pointing this out, not once in your rant did you mention exactly why on a factual level you support John McCain. If you can do that you are more than entitled to your own opinion.

    Until then, live by the mantra that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.

    If you do the real research you’ll see why McCain is wrong for america. Is economic plan is actually projected to contribute more than three trillion to the deficit.

23. michael Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 7:12 pm

    haha

24. Jenn Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 7:31 pm

    and i DO agree with McCains issues.. he wont mess up America unlike your man Obama.. yeah lets pull all the troops out and mess up our intelligence.. great idea. and the economy plan of McCain- way better if you actually listen to him. How about Pro-Life.. oh but your the stuck up school boy king of the world type. riiighht… great example you are.. i say one thing and you lash out. GOOD JOB YOUTH!

25. Jon Goldsmith Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 7:45 pm

    Explicit language is not permitted on this blog. Please refrain from such language. FYI I’ve listened and researched both candidate’s websites and literature, McCain doesn’t know what’s happening. I believe you initiated this quarrel. You are entitled to your false opinions, however, I lashed out at you because you insisted that our staff and readers were of a lesser intellect than yourself.

    On a side note, I think you should vote Obama now because at least in his free health care package, your mental health will be covered by the government.

26. Gabriel Rom Says:
    October 8th, 2008 at 8:12 pm

    Settle down kids. Keep this civil or we’ll have to start deleting.

27. newspapertragedy Says:
    October 9th, 2008 at 8:35 am

    To Whom it May Concern (namely, Mr. Durbanlad, Mr. Goldsmith, and Mr. Rom),

    First of all, I would like to offer a very sincere apology for my hasty and inaccurate previous comment (not to mention my gracefully overlooked misspelling of the word “sycophant”). I had not, in fact, read all of the posts on this website, and had indeed read Mr. Durbanlad’s too quickly. I apologize.

    If I may offer an argument in my defense, however, I would like to say that even after reading the article mentioned by Mr. Rom (“The Case Against Obama”) I still find that the leaning, is as Mr. Goldsmith admitted, much more so to the “left.” The authors of this site are certainly entitled to have such opinions—and I applaud them for their well-reasoned and articulated dissertations, but, the point I intended to make (careless as it was) was to point out that the name “The Purple Youth” would seem to me something of a misnomer if there was not a more substantial representation of the “red” side of the debate. Personally, while I fundamentally find myself more in line with conservative ideals, I see much validity the arguments of those with a more liberal persuasion.

    I would also like to offer my opinion in regards to later posts on this thread. It is my belief, that while there is good reason for substantiative, intellectual debate, I believe that, in a sense, it is best reserved for those with such inclinations. Let me explain. There are certain types of individuals who are blessed with intellectual prowess, critical minds, and astute observation, they enjoy, as Mr. Durbanlad put it “civil, impassioned and rational discourse.” There are others, however, for whom such pursuits are considered lofty—they prefer simpler and broader concepts that make sense with the simpler and broader ideals to which they hold. Neither party is more passionate, or in my opinion, important, than the other, they simply have different strengths and weaknesses. I understand that there is a fine line between what I am saying, and the advocation of ignorance—I only mean to contend that the views of the “simple,” for lack of a better term, should, on certain levels, not be considered invalid simply because they can not easily articulate all of the reasoning behind them.

    For example, there are those who will vote for the next president based solely upon a candidate’s stance on the issue of abortion. To the intellectual crowd, this may seem arbitrary, and too narrow of a focus. Whereas, to the person voting as such, it is considered a fundamental difference between the basic rights of a woman to choose what she does with her body (if you are Pro-Choice), or, the goal of ending the continued death of millions of babies (if you are Pro-Life). The argument could be made, that if the candidate doesn’t hold to such a fundamental principle as the individual holds dear, they will deviate from the voter’s beliefs in other areas as well.

    If I can say one thing to Mr. Goldsmith, you have some great ideas but your attitude could use a serious adjustment. While you are almost militant towards others for not seeing why Obama is the better choice, let me ask you something. Would Barack Obama scold and scorn those who disagreed with him? No, he would not. Obama has been characterized by his belief that the best ideas spawn out of contrasting views. Your ideas are not incorrect and many of them could improve the state of things, but they could be home runs if you just included others–as Obama does.
    Good day, and God bless.

28. newspapertragedy Says:
    October 9th, 2008 at 8:44 am

    Also, just to prevent any misunderstandings that may arise from my post, I am not advocating the way in which Jenn expressed her views below; such remarks are distasteful (as was my initial comment).

29. Jon Goldsmith Says:
    October 9th, 2008 at 10:54 am

    I completely agree with you in regards to remaining purple, however, what we truly view as purple is the ability for anyone of any background of any party to come here and voice their opinions.

30. Max Godnick Says:
    October 9th, 2008 at 12:44 pm

    Jenn, Is there a reason you have turned a political discussion into one of personal standing about people you do not even know.

    Great for you that you have your own beliefs, but you dont need to blast others for theirs. We have not blasted yours.

Leave a Reply