Monday, November 03, 2008

More Republican logic

It's a mother lode

Thanks to the San Francisco Chronicle this morning, we have another brilliant example of Republican reasoning. It is a wonder to behold. This display of erudition is from the Letters to the Editor (with a bit of added emphasis from me)
It's McCain, folks

Editor - So, according to The Chronicle, the Democratic candidate will win the election. Really? Gee, I hate to disappoint you folks, but the simple fact of the matter is that the Republican candidate will win the election for a very simple reason: He is perceived as a good guy—that's all. And right now, the people want a good guy in the White House.

Considering how the current president is universally hated, and how out of favor the Republicans are in general, one would think that the Democratic candidate would be at least ten to fifteen points ahead in the polls, but the exact opposite is the case. Indeed, as election day looms, the race becomes ever tighter. Why is that? Because increasingly, people see that the Democratic candidate is a completely unknown quantity whereas the Republican candidate is completely known. Why the Democrats ever nominated their man for the presidency is beyond me, when Sen. Hillary Clinton was not only deserving of the nomination but, quite frankly, is the only candidate who could have prevailed to the end and won the race for her party.

Walnut Creek
The “exact opposite”? You mean that Obama is ten to fifteen points behind? That's what opposite mean, A.J.

Say, what are they putting in the water in Walnut Creek, anyway?


Yoo said...

When I saw the part about it being a simple fact that the Republican candidate would win, I thought A.J. was going to mention the voting machine manufacturers being in the Republicans' pocket ...

Anonymous said...

Is this letter a farce? That
last name makes me wonder...

Shygetz said...

Because increasingly, people see that the Democratic candidate is a completely unknown quantity whereas the Republican candidate is completely known.

Yeah, as in I KNOW the 2000 John McCain is COMPLETELY different from the 2008 John McCain. But as far as me knowing what a McCain presidency would stand for...not so much. How indebted will he be to the theocrats? Will he throw them under the bus to get back to his anti-"agents of intolerance" positions, or will he embrace them as being his new base?

On the other hand, Obama has been quite consistent as to his platform, so I know exactly who he will feel indebted to.

Anonymous said...

I'm afraid of a Republican win for the same reason as Yoo; they've had eight years to slip some, ah, unadvertised software into those voting machines.

The Ridger, FCD said...

Obama's not as far ahead as he should be if this country were ... sane, I guess. But he's far enough ahead. McCain is so erratic and has rejected every single position he ever held. In what way is he "known"?

I'm not even addressing the "Good Guy" line. Sheesh.

Porlock Junior said...

The name at least isn't a one-shot satire, and I expect it's for real. It has appeared before, with the same sort of brilliance. Remember the Buttafuoco case in NY a few years ago? There's a name to conjure with.

Maybe Walnut Creek is being contaminated with water fromn Half Moon Bay. That's the reliable source of truly insane inane letters to the Chron.

[yes, I know those people in Contra Costa don't actually drink from some eponymous watercourse]