The 2008 Presidential Race

[JerseySean]

I agree it was a calculated move, but I think it was more to let the baby story hit and hopefully fade and potentially avoid the quagmire of the hurriaine turning into areal disaster. That said, I don't think it bodes well for their pick if they thought so little of her ability to handle herself in the midst of all that that they completely removed her from media inquiry.

Its not about removing from media inquiry, its for maximum effect tonight.

[TheMojoPin]

Right his critizism will be valid in about a week. Of course it is calculated. Its not about hiding it is about max impact tonight.

Tonight isn't facing the press. It's another prepared statement. I'm not talking about her public speaking...I'm talking about her facing the press on at least a minimal basis as the Republican VP candidate. I don't see how making it look like they're afraid to have her face the press improves the "maximum effect" of her delivering yet another prepared statement that won't go into anything specific.

[foodcourtdruide]

Even if you look at the DEMOCRAT:devil2: stuff during the primary, youll see similar stuff as well. Drudge usually picks a good story and sensationalized it on his page. Im fine with that and I think he has been pretty fair. As far as a hardon for Palin, this is an exciting time. It is not every day that someone that noone has heard of gets thrust into the national arena like this. You have to admit this is a 4 time in a lifetime event.

How could you look at the reaction to the to Obama's speech and the antiscipation for Palin's speech and not see a clear agenda? Are you really defending the fairness of The Drudge Report?! This stuff really isn't thinly veiled, it's pretty blatant.

[epo]

Even if you look at the DEMOCRAT:devil2: stuff during the primary, youll see similar stuff as well. Drudge usually picks a good story and sensationalized it on his page. Im fine with that and I think he has been pretty fair. As far as a hardon for Palin, this is an exciting time. It is not every day that someone that noone has heard of gets thrust into the national arena like this. You have to admit this is a 4 time in a lifetime event.

I know you are trying to be "funny", but seriously stop it. It is lowering the discourse.

[celery]

http://i34.tinypic.com/9j3eaw.jpg

[NewYorkDragons80]

That said, I don't think it bodes well for their pick if they thought so little of her ability to handle herself in the midst of all that that they completely removed her from media inquiry.
Perhaps, but keeping her hidden until tonight is not without its benefits, especially if she gives a truly impressive speech tonight, then starts talking to reporters for the remainder of the campaign. Like I said, if this isolation is born of some lack of confidence, that will become clear in the next week or two. Tonight, however, is the turning point for that, IMO.

[TheMojoPin]

Perhaps, but keeping her hidden until tonight is not without its benefits, especially if she gives a truly impressive speech tonight, then starts talking to reporters for the remainder of the campaign. Like I said, if this isolation is born of some lack of confidence, that will become clear in the next week or two. Tonight, however, is the turning point for that, IMO.

So far everything about Palin seems to be a giant gamble at best.

That doesn't say much about the current state of the GOP.

[JerseySean]

Tonight isn't facing the press. It's another prepared statement. I'm not talking about her public speaking...I'm talking about her facing the press on at least a minimal basis as the Republican VP candidate. I don't see how making it look like they're afraid to have her face the press improves the "maximum effect" of her delivering yet another prepared statement that won't go into anything specific.

From a campaign prospective this is the right move. Noone would argue with that.

[JerseySean]

Palins remarks tonight

Excerpts: Remarks by Alaska Governor Sarah Palin
Vice Presidential Nominee to Address the 2008 Republican National Convention
Wed Sep 03 2008 19:12:27 ET

SAINT PAUL, Minn. - This evening Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, the Republican Party’s vice presidential nominee, will address the 2008 Republican National Convention. Excerpts from the governor’s remarks:

On her experience as a public servant:

"I had the privilege of living most of my life in a small town. I was just your average hockey mom, and signed up for the PTA because I wanted to make my kids’ public education better. When I ran for city council, I didn’t need focus groups and voter profiles because I knew those voters, and knew their families, too. Before I became governor of the great state of Alaska, I was mayor of my hometown. And since our opponents in this presidential election seem to look down on that experience, let me explain to them what the job involves. I guess a small-town mayor is sort of like a ‘community organizer,’ except that you have actual responsibilities."

On why she is going to Washington, D.C.:

"I’m not a member of the permanent political establishment. And I’ve learned quickly, these past few days, that if you’re not a member in good standing of the Washington elite, then some in the media consider a candidate unqualified for that reason alone. But here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to seek their good opinion - I’m going to Washington to serve the people of this country."

On energy policies that the McCain-Palin administration will implement:

"Our opponents say, again and again, that drilling will not solve all of America’s energy problems - as if we all didn’t know that already. But the fact that drilling won’t solve every problem is no excuse to do nothing at all. Starting in January, in a McCain-Palin administration, we’re going to lay more pipelines...build more nuclear plants...create jobs with clean coal...and move forward on solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative sources. We need American energy resources, brought to you by American ingenuity, and produced by American workers."

On John McCain:

"Here’s how I look at the choice Americans face in this election. In politics, there are some candidates who use change to promote their careers. And then there are those, like John McCain, who use their careers to promote change."

[TheMojoPin]

From a campaign prospective this is the right move. Noone would argue with that.

I'm arguing it right now. Hiding the VP from the press is the silly exception, not the rule. The Republicans doing the same with Bush for 8 years has become a ridiculous joke and just opens up a whole new avenue of attack to be exploited.

[JerseySean]

I'm arguing it right now. Hiding the VP from the press is the silly exception, not the rule. The Republicans doing the same with Bush for 8 years has become a ridiculous joke and just opens up a whole new avenue of attack to be exploited.

To put her out there before she speaks would be a BAD MOVE. It would let people make first hand impressions of her based on dumb gotcha questions from the media. Let them make their INITIAL impression tonight. Then see what happens down the road. Like I said, if she doesnt talk to the press within a week from now, I concede the point but to let her talk now, is just a bad move.

[JerseySean]

I love Mitt. But this speech seems forced. He isnt as good as Thompson was last night. Not even close so far. I hate using the word liberals to describe the opposition.

[TooLowBrow]

penn's view (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/jillette.presidency/index.html)

[JerseySean]

Huckabee killin it!

"She got more votes running for Wassilla, Alaska that Joe Biden got running for President."

[GreatAmericanZero]

Huckabee got a big applause when he mentioned Elvis he shouldve said "and just like how Elvis stole his music from black people, we will steal this election from a black person...and that person is BARACK OBAMA!"


see im a good speech writer

[epo]

I love Mitt. But this speech seems forced. He isnt as good as Thompson was last night. Not even close so far. I hate using the word liberals to describe the opposition.

Mitt was fine. The only problem was content....you know those liberals are the reason that spending exploded and government needs cutting...

Umm...Governor Romney, the facts? Shh...it's convention time!

[NewYorkDragons80]

penn's view (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/02/jillette.presidency/index.html)
I'm disappointed in Penn for having kind words for Bob Barr.

[JerseySean]

I'm disappointed in Penn for having kind words for Bob Barr.

From Drudge:

37,244,000 WATCHED PALIN SPEECH ... [24,029,000 WATCHED BIDEN; 38,379,000 WATCHED OBAMA]... MORE...

Zogby interactive had Obama's lead amongst women down to 7. Ouch

[angrymissy]

From Drudge:

37,244,000 WATCHED PALIN SPEECH ... [24,029,000 WATCHED BIDEN; 38,379,000 WATCHED OBAMA]... MORE...

Zogby interactive had Obama's lead amongst women down to 7. Ouch

Link to that Zogby? Gallup shows Obama gained 2, McCain gained 2.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109975/Obama-Gains-Overall-McCain-Among-GOP-Women.aspx

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080902Women1_flsnerp.gif

[JerseySean]

Link to that Zogby?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109975/Obama-Gains-Overall-McCain-Among-GOP-Women.aspx

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080902Women1_flsnerp.gif

Heard it on POTUS 08 ill try to find it

[JerseySean]

Heard it on POTUS 08 ill try to find it

This poll doesnt factor in last night. As many watched her last night as watched Obama last week

[angrymissy]

This poll doesnt factor in last night. As many watched her last night as watched Obama last week

Ok - but the Zogby poll isn't going to factor in last night either...

[JerseySean]

Ok - but the Zogby poll isn't going to factor in last night either...

I think it may because it was the Zogby interactive released this morning. Im still looking for it.

[angrymissy]

I think it may because it was the Zogby interactive released this morning. Im still looking for it.

Yeah the polls they release in the AM only reflect 2 nights before, so to see real polling on Palin's speech, gotta wait till tomorrow AM.

[HBox]

I wouldn't even bother with a Zogby interactive poll. They are garbage. Here are some examples of what Zogby interactive has given us lately:

Obama +2 in Arkansas
Obama +8 in North Carolina
McCain +4 in New Hampshire
Obama +1 in South Carolina

[epo]

Can we all agree that Gallup and SurveyUSA have done the best job of polling this year? And these Zogby "interactive" polls are the absolutely drizzling shits?

I hate the selective use of polling data, especially when we can all agree upon a standard.

[foodcourtdruide]

Huckabee killin it!

"She got more votes running for Wassilla, Alaska that Joe Biden got running for President."

Hey I can make up things too. This is not a true statement by Huckabee.

[JerseySean]

I wouldn't even bother with a Zogby interactive poll. They are garbage. Here are some examples of what Zogby interactive has given us lately:

Obama +2 in Arkansas
Obama +8 in North Carolina
McCain +4 in New Hampshire
Obama +1 in South Carolina

Point well taken.

[JerseySean]

Hey I can make up things too. This is not a true statement by Huckabee.

Um totally is. Prove it.

[foodcourtdruide]

Can we all agree that Gallup and SurveyUSA have done the best job of polling this year? And these Zogby "interactive" polls are the absolutely drizzling shits?

I hate the selective use of polling data, especially when we can all agree upon a standard.

I'm amazed at intelligent, rational people giving any credence to these polls.

[JerseySean]

Can we all agree that Gallup and SurveyUSA have done the best job of polling this year? And these Zogby "interactive" polls are the absolutely drizzling shits?

I hate the selective use of polling data, especially when we can all agree upon a standard.

Survey USA always catches shit for their push button polls. ZOgby is the best but the interactive needs some work i guess.

[angrymissy]

Gallup seems to be the best and most updated. Zogby looks off from the rest on a regular basis.

Regarding that Huckabee statement?

ST. PAUL, Minn. -- Mike Huckabee made the claim that Palin got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States.

For the record, Joe Biden got 79,754 total votes in the Democratic primaries.

As of the 2000 census, the population of Wasilla was 5,469. It has been reported at currently more than 9,000.

That would mean, conservatively, the entire town of Wasilla would have had to have had a 100% turnout for nine years at 9,000 to top Biden's primary numbers.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/03/1338894.aspx

[JerseySean]

Gallup seems to be the best and most updated. Zogby looks off from the rest on a regular basis.

Regarding that Huckabee statement?

ST. PAUL, Minn. -- Mike Huckabee made the claim that Palin got more votes running for mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, than Joe Biden got running for president of the United States.

For the record, Joe Biden got 79,754 total votes in the Democratic primaries.

As of the 2000 census, the population of Wasilla was 5,469. It has been reported at currently more than 9,000.

That would mean, conservatively, the entire town of Wasilla would have had to have had a 100% turnout for nine years at 9,000 to top Biden's primary numbers.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/03/1338894.aspx

Those were protest votes against Obama and Hillary after Biden dropped out

[epo]

Hey I can make up things too. This is not a true statement by Huckabee.

Yea...Huckabee was absolutely full of shit. Numbers from the Washington Post (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/):

There's just one problem with Huckabee's statement: it's not true. Biden collected a total of 63,157 votes during the Democratic primaries and caucuses this year. By contrast, Wasilla boasts a population of 9,780.

I know that politicians are going to massage the truth, but that is an outright lie.

[JerseySean]

Those were protest votes against Obama and Hillary after Biden dropped out

Biden dropped out after Iowa

[epo]

Those were protest votes against Obama and Hillary after Biden dropped out

Why do you hate the rights of American citizens to express their opinions through their vote? Do their votes not count?

[JerseySean]

Yea...Huckabee was absolutely full of shit. Numbers from the Washington Post (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/):



I know that politicians are going to massage the truth, but that is an outright lie.

Beaten by Kucinich in Iowa and overall, nice!

[foodcourtdruide]

Yea...Huckabee was absolutely full of shit. Numbers from the Washington Post (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/):



I know that politicians are going to massage the truth, but that is an outright lie.

It's ok, apparently the truth isn't necessary when firing up the Republican base.

[JerseySean]

Why do you hate the rights of American citizens to express their opinions through their vote? Do their votes not count?

He got less votes when he was actively running is the point.

[epo]

Biden dropped out after Iowa

Quoting yourself? Come on, you are better than that.

[foodcourtdruide]

Beaten by Kucinich in Iowa and overall, nice!

Nice deflection.

[foodcourtdruide]

He got less votes when he was actively running is the point.

And that's exactly what Huckabee said! Oh wait, no it's not.

[JerseySean]

Quoting yourself? Come on, you are better than that.

Point is while Joe Biden was actively running for President, he got less votes then when Sarah Palin was running for mayor.

[IMSlacker]

Those were protest votes against Obama and Hillary after Biden dropped out

Votes is votes.

[JerseySean]

Nice deflection.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2n9rOpC4gNk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2n9rOpC4gNk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[foodcourtdruide]

Point is while Joe Biden was actively running for President, he got less votes then when Sarah Palin was running for mayor.

Why can't you just admit it was a cheap shot by Huckabee that stretched the truth? Why are you on a crusade to defend and hyperbolize everything the republicans do?

Here.. I'm a democrat. Joe Biden was incorrect by stating that McCain voted alongside Bush 95% of the time. He should have been more clear and stated that he voted alongside Bush 95% of the time in 2007.

[JerseySean]

Why can't you just admit it was a cheap shot by Huckabee that stretched the truth? Why are you on a crusade to defend and hyperbolize everything the republicans do?

Here.. I'm a democrat. Joe Biden was incorrect by stating that McCain voted alongside Bush 95% of the time. He should have been more clear and stated that he voted alongside Bush 95% of the time in 2007.

Its politics. Its ballbusting at a convention. Stop it

[foodcourtdruide]

Its politics. Its ballbusting at a convention. Stop it

So, why are we even on a message board discussing this? Why can't you just admit you were wrong? Geez.

[angrymissy]

Those were protest votes against Obama and Hillary after Biden dropped out

Even if that was the case, Huckabee still lied.

[foodcourtdruide]

Even if that was the case, Huckabee still lied.

Only democrats should be held responsible when they lie. I was amazed at how much the truth was stretched last night.

[JerseySean]

Only democrats should be held responsible when they lie. I was amazed at how much the truth was stretched last night.

What was stretched?

[HBox]

Only democrats should be held responsible when they lie. I was amazed at how much the truth was stretched last night.

AP Fact Check on Palin's speech and others. (http://www.mlive.com/elections/index.ssf/2008/09/fact_check_analyzing_attacks_a.html)

[angrymissy]

Only democrats should be held responsible when they lie. I was amazed at how much the truth was stretched last night.

Yup. And the press isn't ignoring it.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h4Os_NvbBurz0R8IejrDDj-4sRlAD92VLMQ00

booo hbox got it first :(

[JerseySean]

Yup. And the press isn't ignoring it.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h4Os_NvbBurz0R8IejrDDj-4sRlAD92VLMQ00

booo hbox got it first :(

What do you expect from the now no question liberal media. But here you go

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/conventions/27567639.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUec7Pa P3E7_0c:5D:aPc:iUiacyKUU

[angrymissy]

No question liberal media?

The two stories analyzing both conventions are both written by the Associated Press.

[epo]

No question liberal media?

The two stories analyzing both conventions are both written by the Associated Press.

Yes the "liberal" Associated Press with Washington Bureau Chief Ron Fournier who is a John McCain fanboy.

Can we stop the asinine "liberal media" talking point?

[HBox]

<embed FlashVars='videoId=184086' src='http://www.comedycentral.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml' quality='high' bgcolor='#cccccc' width='332' height='316' name='comedy_central_player' align='middle' allowScriptAccess='always' allownetworking='external' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed>

The Daily Show has been on fire since the conventions started.

[Zorro]

Captain Renault: I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here! ...


Politicians stretching the truth... how dare they?

[foodcourtdruide]

What do you expect from the now no question liberal media. But here you go

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/conventions/27567639.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUec7Pa P3E7_0c:5D:aPc:iUiacyKUU

I agree with the criticism of Biden's comments about Obama's health care plan, while it will definitely help some people without insurance now, it is not Universal Health Care. Biden should have used the word "potentially" somewhere in that statement.

See what I did there? I didn't act like a party-drone and criticized Biden for something.

[JerseySean]

FYI

PALIN RAISES MONEY -- FOR OBAMA! **Exclusive** Obama scores $8 million since Palin's speech from over 130,000 donors - on pace to hit $10 million by the time John McCain hits stage, campaign says... Developing...

McCain Source: 'We could not count our donations fast enough'...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/04/opinion/polls/main4416798.shtml

TIED!

Taken before Palins speech.

[Jujubees2]

FYI

PALIN RAISES MONEY -- FOR OBAMA! **Exclusive** Obama scores $8 million since Palin's speech from over 130,000 donors - on pace to hit $10 million by the time John McCain hits stage, campaign says... Developing...

McCain Source: 'We could not count our donations fast enough'...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/04/opinion/polls/main4416798.shtml

TIED!

Taken before Palins speech.

I'm confused. Was that supposed to read Obama Source?

[angrymissy]

FYI

PALIN RAISES MONEY -- FOR OBAMA! **Exclusive** Obama scores $8 million since Palin's speech from over 130,000 donors - on pace to hit $10 million by the time John McCain hits stage, campaign says... Developing...

McCain Source: 'We could not count our donations fast enough'...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/04/opinion/polls/main4416798.shtml

TIED!

Taken before Palins speech.

CBS is the only polling organization reporting a tie.

Obama is up 8 in Gallup, and up 5 on Rasmussen.

[angrymissy]

I'm confused. Was that supposed to read Obama Source?

Drudge must have made a mistake :laugh:

[JerseySean]

I'm confused. Was that supposed to read Obama Source?

No it was two seperate reports

[JerseySean]

CBS is the only polling organization reporting a tie.

Obama is up 8 in Gallup, and up 5 on Rasmussen.

Those were both daily tracking polls. this was more comprhenseive and the most important thing is that it shows an 8 point drop in a week for Obama. It shows good movement for McCain. Interesting article.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/51_say_reporters_are_trying_to_hurt_palin_39_say_s he_has_better_experience_than_obama

[epo]

CBS is the only polling organization reporting a tie.

Obama is up 8 in Gallup, and up 5 on Rasmussen.

Didn't we say something about agreeing to a standardized source for polling, rather than cherry-picking?

[angrymissy]

Those were both daily tracking polls. this was more comprhenseive and the most important thing is that it shows an 8 point drop in a week for Obama. It shows good movement for McCain. Interesting article.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/51_say_reporters_are_trying_to_hurt_palin_39_say_s he_has_better_experience_than_obama

Did you read the other polls? CBS' poll is not more comprehensive in any way, in fact, CBS did not even post their methodology, and polled less people than Gallup. Gallup polled 2,771 while CBS polled 835.

By the way, the Gallup poll was taken during the exact same time frame the CBS poll was: 9/1-9/3

[JerseySean]

Did you read the other polls? CBS' poll is not more comprehensive in any way, in fact, CBS did not even post their methodology, and polled less people than Gallup. Gallup polled 2,771 while CBS polled 835.

By the way, the Gallup poll was taken during the exact same time frame the CBS poll was: 9/1-9/3

VOTE FOR PRESIDENT – Demographics
(Among registered voters)
Obama McCain
All 42% 42
Men 41% 46 mcCain needs to move this upward
Women 43% 38 Couldnt be better for McCain
Republicans 5% 83
Democrats 78% 11 Too high for McCain
Independents 39% 36 Ill take that right now
Clinton supporters 69% 16 TROUBLING FOR OBAMA
Whites 36% 47 Were Awesome
White men 35% 51 We are awesome
White women 37% 44 I love white women
Age < 45 46% 36 Lower turnout Voters
Age 45 and over 38% 47 HIGH TURNOUT VOTERS
Married 37% 48
Not married 50% 32
White evangelicals 18% 66 Needs to be bigger for McCain
------------------------------------------------------------------
This poll was conducted among a random sample of 835 adults nationwide, including 734 registered voters, interviewed by telephone September 1-3, 2008. Phone numbers were dialed from RDD samples of both standard land-lines and cell phones. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points; for registered voters the sampling error could be plus or minus four percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher.

The bottom line is that these numbers are HUGELY troubling for Obama.

[angrymissy]

VOTE FOR PRESIDENT – Demographics
(Among registered voters)
Obama McCain
All 42% 42
Men 41% 46 mcCain needs to move this upward
Women 43% 38 Couldnt be better for McCain
Republicans 5% 83
Democrats 78% 11 Too high for McCain
Independents 39% 36 Ill take that right now
Clinton supporters 69% 16 TROUBLING FOR OBAMA
Whites 36% 47 Were Awesome
White men 35% 51 We are awesome
White women 37% 44 I love white women
Age < 45 46% 36 Lower turnout Voters
Age 45 and over 38% 47 HIGH TURNOUT VOTERS
Married 37% 48
Not married 50% 32
White evangelicals 18% 66 Needs to be bigger for McCain
------------------------------------------------------------------
This poll was conducted among a random sample of 835 adults nationwide, including 734 registered voters, interviewed by telephone September 1-3, 2008. Phone numbers were dialed from RDD samples of both standard land-lines and cell phones. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points; for registered voters the sampling error could be plus or minus four percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher.

The bottom line is that these numbers are HUGELY troubling for Obama.

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080904DailyUpdateGraph1_tyhnmbv.gif

http://www.gallup.com/poll/108049/Candidate-Support-Political-Party-Ideology.aspx
http://www.gallup.com/poll/108022/Candidate-Support-Gender.aspx

The bottom line is that the Gallup numbers are HUGELY troubling for McCain.

See what I did there?

By the way, what you quoted wasn't the methodology. The methodology shows how many people who were polled are Republican, how many are Democrat, etc.

I'll take more stock in the Gallup poll, considering they interviewed 3 times as many people.

[JerseySean]

Did you read the other polls? CBS' poll is not more comprehensive in any way, in fact, CBS did not even post their methodology, and polled less people than Gallup. Gallup polled 2,771 while CBS polled 835.

By the way, the Gallup poll was taken during the exact same time frame the CBS poll was: 9/1-9/3

And gallup runs an AVERAGE of three days of polling on that

[JerseySean]

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/080904DailyUpdateGraph1_tyhnmbv.gif

The bottom line is that the Gallup numbers are HUGELY troubling for McCain.

See what I did there?

By the way, what you quoted wasn't the methodology. The methodology shows how many people who were polled are Republican, how many are Democrat, etc.

I'll take more stock in the Gallup poll, considering they interviewed 3 times as many people.

Methodology is always incomplete. its more than Republican and Dems, etc.

[angrymissy]

And gallup runs an AVERAGE of three days of polling on that

And CBS does not? My point is, they are the same poll.

EDIT - Gallup does not run an Average... I don't see that anywhere on their page. They interview people for the 3 days, then post the data. Nothing is averaged.

The general-election results are based on combined data from Sept. 1-3, 2008

[JerseySean]

So what is the official ronfez.net poll? By the way, 538.com blows and is heavily slanted. Check out pollster.com

[angrymissy]

I always check Gallup. They have a daily system in place, so they're consistent, and interview more people than the other polls.

[epo]

So what is the official ronfez.net poll? By the way, 538.com blows and is heavily slanted. Check out pollster.com

You may not like 538's articles, but their statistical model is very, very solid.

Personally I am comfortable with Gallup. Their use of a 3-day rolling percentage is a solid model for a tracking poll.

[JerseySean]

I always check Gallup. They have a daily system in place, so they're consistent, and interview more people than the other polls.

But Gallup, historicaly has always been wrong. here are 2 analyses from 2004.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1274530/posts

http://www.androidworld.com/prod35.htm

[angrymissy]

But Gallup, historicaly has always been wrong. here are 2 analyses from 2004.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1274530/posts

http://www.androidworld.com/prod35.htm

Pretty much every poll was wrong in 2004.

[JerseySean]

Pretty much every poll was wrong in 2004.

Yes but ranked well below the other companies that I normally cite.

[FezsAssistant]

4% of media outlets being conservative (4% is generous considering one TV network, maybe one publication and a few radio shows)= HORRIBLE CONSERVATIVE MEDIA in the eyes of liberals. Anyone who doesn't lick democrat's asses and only ask them easy questions is considered CONSERVATIVE!
FoxNews isn't as conservative as people make it out to be either. the people criticizing it never watched it. they just believe what michael moore tells them.

[HBox]

they just believe what michael moore tells them.

OH YA GOT ME!

Just give me a few more minutes for further comment until Michael calls me and tells me what to say.

[Jujubees2]

4% of media outlets being conservative (4% is generous considering one TV network, maybe one publication and a few radio shows)= HORRIBLE CONSERVATIVE MEDIA in the eyes of liberals. Anyone who doesn't lick democrat's asses and only ask them easy questions is considered CONSERVATIVE!
FoxNews isn't as conservative as people make it out to be either. the people criticizing it never watched it. they just believe what michael moore tells them.

Sorry. I would have chimed in sooner about how right you are but I just got back from Cuba where I had some medical issues taken care of.

[scottinnj]

Actually imo, this election cycle it seems MSNBC is liberal, FOX is conservative and CNN is the impartial cable news network.

Last cycle, FOX was the conservative network, CNN had the liberal slant, and MSNBC was nothing, because nobody watched them.

[K.C.]

Actually imo, this election cycle it seems MSNBC is liberal, FOX is conservative and CNN is the impartial cable news network.

Last cycle, FOX was the conservative network, CNN had the liberal slant, and MSNBC was nothing, because nobody watched them.

Nobody watches MSNBC, still.

[HBox]

Nobody watches MSNBC, still.

I watch for the fights.

[GreatAmericanZero]

I will admit i had a lot of interest in seeing Sarah Palin's speech


but I have no interest in seeing John McCain speech today. Anyone else feel like that? I felt like I already saw "the show"

[JerseySean]

I will admit i had a lot of interest in seeing Sarah Palin's speech


but I have no interest in seeing John McCain speech today. Anyone else feel like that? I felt like I already saw "the show"

I am interested to see the content tonight and I will be interested to see if he plays to the room or outside.

[HBox]

I have a new hero:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0_iQobCNGas&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0_iQobCNGas&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Jujubees2]

I will admit i had a lot of interest in seeing Sarah Palin's speech


but I have no interest in seeing John McCain speech today. Anyone else feel like that? I felt like I already saw "the show"

I was thinking the same thing. It seems Palin's speech was the big one for the GOP while Obama's was for the Dems.

[GreatAmericanZero]

I was thinking the same thing. It seems Palin's speech was the big one for the GOP while Obama's was for the Dems.

yeah..i dont remember any hype for Joe Bidens speech, it was all about Obamas.


But now, I feel like I saw the moment. I had on PBS coverage all evening yesterday, today i havent even put on any type of news channel (im watching a repeat of Seinfeld)

[JerseySean]

I have a new hero:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/0_iQobCNGas&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/0_iQobCNGas&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Does anyone remember a certain industry that was created in the 90's. HMMMM....
Can anyone think of it, it seems like its right at my fingertips....

[GreatAmericanZero]

I have a new hero:



hahaha...FACE!

[epo]

Does anyone remember a certain industry that was created in the 90's. HMMMM....
Can anyone think of it, it seems like its right at my fingertips....

And there are two that a certain President since 2000 has blatantly ignored for personal reasons and not given a lick of support:


Medical innovation (i.e. Stem Cells)
Clean energy innovation


Cuz, you know the Republicans NEVER stand in the way of new industry!

[JerseySean]

And there are two that a certain President since 2000 has blatantly ignored for personal reasons and not given a lick of support:


Medical innovation (i.e. Stem Cells)
Clean energy innovation


Cuz, you know the Republicans NEVER stand in the way of new industry!

McCain supports both.

[epo]

McCain supports both.

The point wasn't McCain. The point was each President is offered opportunities to advance the cause of their nation. Regardless of what you think of the man, Clinton opened the interwebz up. Bush however had 2 potential opportunities and ignored them both.

[JerseySean]

The point wasn't McCain. The point was each President is offered opportunities to advance the cause of their nation. Regardless of what you think of the man, Clinton opened the interwebz up. Bush however had 2 potential opportunities and ignored them both.

I dont know that to be fact but Ill trust you. Point is had nothing to do with tax policy....shitdick

[HBox]

Nobody watches MSNBC, still.

I watch for the fights.

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT (This is a link, BTW) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/chris-matthews-vs-pat-buc_n_124047.html)

[epo]

Former Clinton Secretary of Labor has an interesting blog posting this week (http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2008/09/vetting.html) about the "vetting" process and the pain in the arse it was for him. I wonder with his description of the process whether or not the McCain campaign really did their due diligence with Governor Palin.

[keithy_19]

OH YA GOT ME!

Just give me a few more minutes for further comment until Michael calls me and tells me what to say.

He's telling you to eat.

[K.C.]

No change in today's Gallup. Obama 49, McCain 42.

This covers the first three nights of the convention, including the Palin speech.

http://media.gallup.com/poll/graphs/election2008_HP_1.gif



Rasmussen has a slight shift back to McCain. Obama 46 (-2 from last week), McCain 45 (+2 from last week).

[HBox]

Gallup hasn't released today's poll yet.

[K.C.]

Gallup hasn't released today's poll yet.

Fuck, I thought today was the 4th.

[JerseySean]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110110/Gallup-Daily-McCains-Bounce-Gives-Him-5Point-Lead.aspx

Bigger bounce than Bush, Kerry or Obama. 49-44 McCain. I predicted last week it would be 46-44 Obama.

[Jujubees2]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110110/Gallup-Daily-McCains-Bounce-Gives-Him-5Point-Lead.aspx

Bigger bounce than Bush, Kerry or Obama. 49-44 McCain. I predicted last week it would be 46-44 Obama.

Then I guess you were wrong.

[JerseySean]

Then I guess you were wrong.

Perceptive of you

[angrymissy]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110110/Gallup-Daily-McCains-Bounce-Gives-Him-5Point-Lead.aspx

Bigger bounce than Bush, Kerry or Obama. 49-44 McCain. I predicted last week it would be 46-44 Obama.

I wish the Dems had their convention 2nd.

Anyway, next poll to look at will be after the debates. That, I am looking forward to.

[Dirtybird12]

when do the debates begin? any dates?

[Zorro]

I wish the Dems had their convention 2nd.

Anyway, next poll to look at will be after the debates. That, I am looking forward to.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

The state polls are what really counts and they still look pretty blue

[epo]

I wish the Dems had their convention 2nd.

Anyway, next poll to look at will be after the debates. That, I am looking forward to.

Look at the polls in about a week. Right now Governor Palin is giving McCain a nice bump.

[Zorro]

Look at the polls in about a week. Right now Governor Palin is giving McCain a nice bump.

I am not arguing that McCain is getting a bump, but why? What is it about Obama that he can't seem to close the deal? Wasn't Clinton like 17pts ahead of Dole at this point.
Seriously; the Republicans have fucked this country up so much that the Dems should be just kicking ass, but instead Obama'a head is barely above water. Are the polls that wrong? Are Americans really that naive? Is the fix in? A month ago we were talking Obama landslide and compared to the Dems the Republican convention was a borefest.

Am I missing something here?

[angrymissy]

I am not arguing that McCain is getting a bump, but why? What is it about Obama that he can't seem to close the deal? Wasn't Clinton like 17pts ahead of Dole at this point.
Seriously; the Republicans have fucked this country up so much that the Dems should be just kicking ass, but instead Obama'a head is barely above water. Are the polls that wrong? Are Americans really that naive? Is the fix in? A month ago we were talking Obama landslide and compared to the Dems the Republican convention was a borefest.

Am I missing something here?

I know the racism card is played out... but I know quite a few people who won't vote for him simply because he is black. I've heard it said a lotttt (work/family), and thats in ye olden liberal metro NY area. For example, my grandma would have voted for Hillary, but no way in hell will she vote for a black guy.

[JerseySean]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

The state polls are what really counts and they still look pretty blue

Most of that is old polling data, pre convention

[Zorro]

I know the racism card is played out... but I know quite a few people who won't vote for him simply because he is black. I've heard it said a lotttt (work/family), and thats in ye olden liberal metro NY area. For example, my grandma would have voted for Hillary, but no way in hell will she vote for a black guy.

My mom who is probably the same age as your grandmother feels exactly the same way. But when it comes to polling the numbers for Obama always showed better than he did because people would never tell a pollster they wouldn't vote for a black guy.. So if this is what the polls saying and you have that "Tom Bradley" effect what does that mean?

I really thought the Dems could run Satan himself and still trounce McCain...am I wrong?

[NickyL0885]

Like Bill Maher said. People will say they want Obama. But when the step in that booth, they will find it hard to pull the trigger an vote for McCain.

Then you got the south minded who "wont put a nigger in the white house!". this country is so fucking back words. I dont care if the person is black, white, pink, green, blue, or purple. If he/she is going to do the best job, then thats the person i want.

[JerseySean]

I really thought the Dems could run Satan himself and still trounce McCain...am I wrong?

They did and yes, you are wrong

[Zorro]

They did and yes, you are wrong

very well played my friend...bravo

[angrymissy]

My mom who is probably the same age as your grandmother feels exactly the same way. But when it comes to polling the numbers for Obama always showed better than he did because people would never tell a pollster they wouldn't vote for a black guy.. So if this is what the polls saying and you have that "Tom Bradley" effect what does that mean?

I really thought the Dems could run Satan himself and still trounce McCain...am I wrong?

I read an article that analyzed poll results in the Primaries and actually showed a "Reverse Bradley Effect" for Obama.. I can't find the article, but it was very detailed.

-found it - http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/persistent-myth-of-bradley-effect.html

[GreatAmericanZero]

i think if you are not going to vote for Obama, you'll make up a reason...just use one of the republican buzzwords flying around. I couldn't imagine there are people out there that think they would be thought of as racist if they don't vote for him at this point

[Zorro]

They did and yes, you are wrong

Like Bill Maher said. People will say they want Obama. But when the step in that booth, they will find it hard to pull the trigger an vote for McCain.

Then you got the south minded who "wont put a nigger in the white house!". this country is so fucking back words. I dont care if the person is black, white, pink, green, blue, or purple. If he/she is going to do the best job, then thats the person i want.

I know we like to think everything is recent, but what Maher is referring to is the "Bradley" effect and it's been around since 1982. Sad to think nothing has changed in 25 years.

I also realize we're oh so cosmopolitan here in the north, but the "south mind" you talk about doesn't exist ... in case you missed it Obama won lots of southern states...lost New York, Mass ...etc...etc....

[HBox]

I am not arguing that McCain is getting a bump, but why? What is it about Obama that he can't seem to close the deal? Wasn't Clinton like 17pts ahead of Dole at this point.
Seriously; the Republicans have fucked this country up so much that the Dems should be just kicking ass, but instead Obama'a head is barely above water. Are the polls that wrong? Are Americans really that naive? Is the fix in? A month ago we were talking Obama landslide and compared to the Dems the Republican convention was a borefest.

Am I missing something here?

The fact is that this environment makes a blowout extremely improbable. Each candidate has a floor of 40% if everything goes wrong (excluding being found with a dead hooker, but with the cult of personality going on on both sides I think even that would only drop them to 30%).

Another part is a strategy by the McCain campaign to set low expectations so they can easily succeed and gain positive press. It also allows them to say shit like "What is wrong with Obama that he isn't blowing us out" casting all sorts of non-specific aspersions.

And there's also the fact that aside from Ron Paul McCain is viewed as being the most separated Republican from the establishment. He's not carrying nearly the stigma that just about every other Republican running this year carries.

[HBox]

[URL="<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LgUDD_iT_F0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LgUDD_iT_F0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>"]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie"

Here's a video of a press conference Palin had with Ted Stevens where she admits that the only reason she stopped supporting earmarks is because it's politically untenable and she has to learn to "deal with it."

[NewYorkDragons80]

I wish the Dems had their convention 2nd.

Anyway, next poll to look at will be after the debates. That, I am looking forward to.
Yeah, why would anybody agree to have their convention first? Do they rotate it every election cycle?

[HBox]

Yeah, why would anybody agree to have their convention first? Do they rotate it every election cycle?

I have no idea but they don't rotate because the Republicans were last last time too. I'm guessing the Republicans just schedule theirs first and make it for as late as is possible. If I were the Democrats and this happened again I'd just schedule the DNC the same week and fuck it up for both of them.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I read an article that analyzed poll results in the Primaries and actually showed a "Reverse Bradley Effect" for Obama.. I can't find the article, but it was very detailed.

-found it - http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/08/persistent-myth-of-bradley-effect.html
For the country's sake, I hope that's true. However, they're only analyzing the Democratic primaries. Some allow independents, some don't. The fact remains, however, that the Democratic primaries are not a cross-section of this country.

[Zorro]

From the article missy quoteed in her post. For all the northeast liberal types. I found this paragraph particularly insightful.

Obama also outperformed his polls in the Midwest and the West (although there is not much data to go on in the latter case). The one region where Hillary Clinton overperformed her numbers was in the Northeast, bettering the pre-election trendline by 1.8 points. Recall that the Bradley Effect phenomenon describes covert rather than overt manifestations of racism. It may be that in the Northeast, which is arguably the most "politically correct" region of the country, expressions of racism are the least socially acceptable, and that therefore some people may misstate their intentions to pollsters. By contrast, in the South and the Midwest, if people are racist they will usually be pretty open about it, and in the West, which is nation's most multicultural region, there may be relatively little racism, either expressed or implicit.

[TheMojoPin]

HBox, post 2870 is screwing up the page layout and I can't scroll past it. Can you edit out the videos?

[epo]

I am not arguing that McCain is getting a bump, but why? What is it about Obama that he can't seem to close the deal? Wasn't Clinton like 17pts ahead of Dole at this point.
Seriously; the Republicans have fucked this country up so much that the Dems should be just kicking ass, but instead Obama'a head is barely above water. Are the polls that wrong? Are Americans really that naive? Is the fix in? A month ago we were talking Obama landslide and compared to the Dems the Republican convention was a borefest.

Am I missing something here?

To me its about message discipline. When Obama is on message and talking about his platform he's solid and voters like him. When he's off message and talking about stupid shit like 3AM or Governor Palin's shoes, voters don't like him.

If you noticed on Saturday and Sunday, Obama and Biden both got back on message. I would guess in a week, Obama will be up by 2 in the Gallup daily.

[JerseySean]

I know we like to think everything is recent, but what Maher is referring to is the "Bradley" effect and it's been around since 1982. Sad to think nothing has changed in 25 years.

I also realize we're oh so cosmopolitan here in the north, but the "south mind" you talk about doesn't exist ... in case you missed it Obama won lots of southern states...lost New York, Mass ...etc...etc....

That is not true. The Bradley effect was renamed the "Wilder" effect in 1991. Doug Wilder won the race in Virginia, but not near the margin that was expected.

[HBox]

HBox, post 2870 is screwing up the page layout and I can't scroll past it. Can you edit out the videos?

I can't edit it anymore. I would if I could.

[Zorro]

That is not true. The Bradley effect was renamed the "Wilder" effect in 1991. Doug Wilder won the race in Virginia, but not near the margin that was expected.

Ok so if it was "renamed" in '91 that means it existed before so just how is what I said not true.

[Recyclerz]

Yeah, why would anybody agree to have their convention first? Do they rotate it every election cycle?

In past elections, the Democratic nominees usually were running out of money raised for the primary season and had to have their convention first so they could get their paws on the federal money for the general election. Obviously, this year has worked out differently with both Obama (and Clinton) raising gobs of cash from ordinary saps like me, but they planned the convention before it was clear that's what would happen. I don't know if this fund-raising prowess from the Democrats will last or is just a function of people who were so fed up with the fucktards in charge that we (:innocent:) decided it was more important to fund the fight against 'em than to fully fund our IRAs that year.

[Dude!]

i think if you are not going to vote for Obama, you'll make up a reason...just use one of the republican buzzwords flying around. I couldn't imagine there are people out there that think they would be thought of as racist if they don't vote for him at this point


the fun part of this racism thing is that republicans always vote for republicans
if mccain were running against kerry or dukakis or mondale or obama
he would get the same amount of republican votes..virtually all

so if obama loses it will not be republican racism
it will be racism on the part of democrats and independents

[Dude!]

shock poll
mccain now up 20% in north carolina

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/politics&id=6380065

obama thought he had a chance in nc
he doesnt

he thinks he has a chance in virginia
i bet you that chance is gone too

[TheMojoPin]

shock poll
mccain now up 20% in north carolina

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/politics&id=6380065

obama thought he had a chance in nc
he doesnt

he thinks he has a chance in virginia
i bet you that chance is gone too

Both of the Carolinas were likely GOP takes before that poll, and the projections that had and still have Obama winning always counted both to the Republicans. Vrginia is still questionable, though McCain likely leads there by about 2 points right now. That said, a single poll showing a sudden 10-15 point surge is likely pretty far off.

[epo]

Both of the Carolinas were likely GOP takes before that poll, and the projections that had and still have Obama winning always counted both to the Republicans. Vrginia is still questionable, though McCain likely leads there by about 2 points right now. That said, a single poll showing a sudden 10-15 point surge is likely pretty far off.

I've never seen either of the Carolinas in the "swing" or "need" categories for the Obama campaign.

I still think Virginia is very much in play for the Obama campaign and actually very desirable to them. That is a state in which they will use resources in.

[TheMojoPin]

I've never seen either of the Carolinas in the "swing" or "need" categories for the Obama campaign.

I still think Virginia is very much in play for the Obama campaign and actually very desirable to them. That is a state in which they will use resources in.

Though it's pretty likely I'll vote for Obama, for either candidate I'm going to keep my registration in VA and vote absentee since it is very likely a swing state. Illinois is obviously going to Obama, so I'd like my vote to be applied somewhere where it actually could make a difference.

[JerseySean]

I've never seen either of the Carolinas in the "swing" or "need" categories for the Obama campaign.

I still think Virginia is very much in play for the Obama campaign and actually very desirable to them. That is a state in which they will use resources in.

North Carolina WAS a swing state. It has the ability to be in play due to its large black population and with Obama's large money advantage. Updated swing state list,

Pa, Oh, Mi, Wi, NM, CO, Mn, IA, NH

Florida is solid red. Virginia will be fine for McCain. By my count, Obama only has 189 EVs in the bag.

http://www.politicker.com/270towin/270towin.html

[TheMojoPin]

North Carolina WAS a swing state. It has the ability to be in play due to its large black population and with Obama's large money advantage. Updated swing state list,

Pa, Oh, Mi, Wi, NM, CO, Mn, IA, NH

Florida is solid red. Virginia will be fine for McCain. By my count, Obama only has 189 EVs in the bag.

http://www.politicker.com/270towin/270towin.html

This count (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/) is much more likely to be accurate than yours, or anyone else's count. NC wasn't a gimme, but McCain has been trending there with around a 3-4 point lead.

[JerseySean]

This count (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/) is much more likely to be accurate than yours, or anyone else's count. NC wasn't a gimme, but McCain has been trending there with around a 3-4 point lead.

McCain is up 20 in NC. Also I am not including swing states. Just the ones I feel will be solidly red. Also, this webite's alalysis is terribly biased and the polls are in many cases cherrypicked. realclearpolitics is much better.

[TheMojoPin]

McCain is up 20 in NC. Also I am not including swing states. Just the ones I feel will be solidly red. Also, this webite's alalysis is terribly biased and the polls are in many cases cherrypicked. realclearpolitics is much better.

FTE is widely considered acoss the political spectrum to be the most accurate poll tracker this year. It's basically the gold standard at this point. It's run by the guy that created PECOTA stats analysis for basebll, and the site boils down to the numbers, period.

McCain is supposedly up by 20 in NC according to a single poll.

[epo]

North Carolina WAS a swing state. It has the ability to be in play due to its large black population and with Obama's large money advantage. Updated swing state list,

Pa, Oh, Mi, Wi, NM, CO, Mn, IA, NH

Florida is solid red. Virginia will be fine for McCain. By my count, Obama only has 189 EVs in the bag.

http://www.politicker.com/270towin/270towin.html

Or it's tied according to the Fox News/Rasmussen poll at 48%.

See what I did there? I cherry picked information to make my point.

[HBox]

About that North Carolina poll........... (http://www.pollster.com/blogs/about_that_north_carolina_poll.php)

Seems there was a pretty drastic change in party ID in the recent NC poll.

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/surveyusapolls.PNG

[epo]

About that North Carolina poll........... (http://www.pollster.com/blogs/about_that_north_carolina_poll.php)

Seems there was a pretty drastic change in party ID in the recent NC poll.



And yet Democrats out registered the Republicans this year for new voters? I declare shitty polling!

[angrymissy]

Just lovely.

http://www.michiganmessenger.com/4076/lose-your-house-lose-your-vote

The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP’s effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.

State election rules allow parties to assign “election challengers” to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they “have a good reason to believe” that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a “true resident of the city or township.”

The Michigan Republicans’ planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being “true residents.”

One expert questioned the legality of the tactic.

“You can’t challenge people without a factual basis for doing so,” said J. Gerald Hebert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department who now runs the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington D.C.-based public-interest law firm. “I don’t think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.”

[celery]

I'm convinced Obama is leading by more than the polls are claiming. This is really gonna be an amazing race to follow...

[celery]

Hmm, I wonder if this is leading to an October Surprise:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/09/AR2008090903404.html?g=1

[Dude!]

this simple statement is the most eye-opening thing i have read yet:

Anyone who thinks the presidential election should be a layup for Obama should remember that Democrats have broken the 50 percent barrier in presidential elections only twice since 1944.

wow i did not know that

i checked and in the same period republicans have won over 50% of the vote
8 times

dems pretty long odds for the dems

[tele7]

sarah palin live now on Cnn

[epo]

sarah palin live now on Cnn

Trying to fight Obama on Letterman?

[scottinnj]

According to Fox News coverage, I'd bet a bunch of ham 'n' eggers would answer "Palin" to that question.

JESUS CHRIST!!! They did a Fox News Alert (*BONG!*) to have Greta Van Sustren announce

"This is a Fox News Alert! Governor Palin is back in Alaska."

Now they are running her homecoming speech live.

[celery]

Gotta love youtube:

McCain: Calls Hillary "Lipstick on a Pig" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMPYkNQlJMM)

[epo]

According to Fox News coverage, I'd bet a bunch of ham 'n' eggers would answer "Palin" to that question.

JESUS CHRIST!!! They did a Fox News Alert (*BONG!*) to have Greta Van Sustren announce

"This is a Fox News Alert! Governor Palin is back in Alaska."

Now they are running her homecoming speech live.

The beauty is that it's a campaign rally, not a REAL interview. Come on Sarah, answer some real questions!

[scottinnj]

sarah palin live now on Cnn

Boooo! It's basically her acceptance speech from the RNC reworded.

"That plane on Ebay? Sold!"

"Nuclear power, drill now"

[scottinnj]

The beauty is that it's a campaign rally, not a REAL interview. Come on Sarah, answer some real questions!

Did she do the Charlie interview yet?

[Dude!]

Boooo! It's basically her acceptance speech from the RNC reworded.

"That plane on Ebay? Sold!"

"Nuclear power, drill now"

she is staying
on message

obama needs to do that
as epo always points out

[scottinnj]

STAY ON TARGET!!
http://www.cynical-c.com/archives/bloggraphics/stay_on_target.gif
STAY ON TARGET!!!

[epo]

STAY ON TARGET!!
http://www.cynical-c.com/archives/bloggraphics/stay_on_target.gif
STAY ON TARGET!!!

He's on Letterman now...and very much on message.

Thank God.

[K.C.]

Did she do the Charlie interview yet?

People need to stop worrying about this broad.

She's almost meaningless in the grand scheme of things, and wasting time on her is, in fact, a waste of time.

Let Biden mop her up at the debates and be done with it.


Obama and Biden, in the mean time, should focus 100% of their efforts in tying Zombie McCain to Bush.

They do that, they win.

[tele7]

Sarah saying "laying some pipeline" was the only highlight for me.

[scottinnj]

Sarah saying "laying some pipeline" was the only highlight for me.

:clap: :thumbup:

http://www.imagetravelinc.com/img/EgyptianPyramids.jpg

[Dude!]

People need to stop worrying about this broad.

She's almost meaningless in the grand scheme of things, and wasting time on her is, in fact, a waste of time.

Let Biden mop her up at the debates and be done with it.


Obama and Biden, in the mean time, should focus 100% of their efforts in tying Zombie McCain to Bush.

They do that, they win.


are you serious

biden has a horrible eye-job and horrible hair transplant and horrible chiclet veneers on his teeth
all the cosmetic stuff reinforces the message that he is fake
like the typical politician
and like the typical politician he is all me me me and doesnt know when to stfu

tonight biden said obama should of picked hillary as vp
what an idiot

palin is the non-typical politician
she comes across as authentic and natural

biden may beat her in technical points in the debates
but she will clean his clock in terms of public perception

[celery]

People need to stop worrying about this broad.

She's almost meaningless in the grand scheme of things, and wasting time on her is, in fact, a waste of time.

Let Biden mop her up at the debates and be done with it.


Obama and Biden, in the mean time, should focus 100% of their efforts in tying Zombie McCain to Bush.

They do that, they win.

well said - this is gonna be a fun one to watch. If they stick to the issues, Biden will destroy her.

[YourAmishDaddy]

If they stick to the issues, Biden will destroy her.

It was decided a while back by the McCain camp this election will not be about issues. It's about personalities.

Which makes sense. If you were John McCain with his horrible record would you run on issues?

[JerseySean]

This election could come down to who wins the town of Omaha, Nebraska.

Two new national polls show the presidential race tied, while three others give Sen. John McCain a slight edge over Sen. Barack Obama.

Democracy Corps: McCain 48%, Obama 46%

InsiderAdvantage: Obama 46%, McCain 46%

Hotline/Diageo: McCain 46%, Obama 44%

Gallup Daily: McCain 48%, Obama 44%

Rasmussen: Obama 46%, McCain 46%.

[epo]

This election could come down to who wins the town of Omaha, Nebraska.

Two new national polls show the presidential race tied, while three others give Sen. John McCain a slight edge over Sen. Barack Obama.

Democracy Corps: McCain 48%, Obama 46%

InsiderAdvantage: Obama 46%, McCain 46%

Hotline/Diageo: McCain 46%, Obama 44%

Gallup Daily: McCain 48%, Obama 44%

Rasmussen: Obama 46%, McCain 46%.

You and I both know that national polls are kinda silly. The state by states are what truly matters.

The data is showing that a bulk of McCain's surge is strengthening the base in much of red state America rather than moving individual states by big numbers.

[Zorro]

People need to stop worrying about this broad.

She's almost meaningless in the grand scheme of things, and wasting time on her is, in fact, a waste of time.

Let Biden mop her up at the debates and be done with it.


Obama and Biden, in the mean time, should focus 100% of their efforts in tying Zombie McCain to Bush.

They do that, they win.

I agree with everything, but calling her a broad.

[JerseySean]

You and I both know that national polls are kinda silly. The state by states are what truly matters.

The data is showing that a bulk of McCain's surge is strengthening the base in much of red state America rather than moving individual states by big numbers.

No I saw an Ohio poll that had him down 5 but one in PA. I see movement in Colorado, NM, VA and WI. Even in NJ he has closed the gap to 6. My point is, it looks like this one is a nailbiter. Its tough to see McCain wiining this thing with more than 273 and it is not that unlikely that it is a 269-269 tie.

[starvingkids]

No I saw an Ohio poll that had him down 5 but one in PA. I see movement in Colorado, NM, VA and WI. Even in NJ he has closed the gap to 6. My point is, it looks like this one is a nailbiter. Its tough to see McCain wiining this thing with more than 273 and it is not that unlikely that it is a 269-269 tie.

what would happen if there were a tie? coin toss?

[JerseySean]

what would happen if there were a tie? coin toss?

It would go to the House of representatives. Then whoever wins the most state delegations in the house, would win. Right now Dems hold a 26-22 lead in delegations.

[starvingkids]

It would go to the House of representatives. Then whoever wins the most state delegations in the house, would win. Right now Dems hold a 26-22 lead in delegations.

ahhh thats right.... thanks!!!!! that would be fun.

[JerseySean]

It would be a disaster. There would be 30 recounts nationwide. The House members would have to give it to the person with the lead in the popular vote, OR delegations would vote for whoever won their state.

[JerseySean]

State polls

Political Wire got an advance look at two new Strategic Vision polls that will be released tomorrow.

Ohio: McCain 48%, Obama 44%.

Georgia: McCain 52%, Obama 39%.

[Zorro]

It would be a disaster. There would be 30 recounts nationwide. The House members would have to give it to the person with the lead in the popular vote, OR delegations would vote for whoever won their state.

I was always under the impression that the vote in the house is "individual" not by state...
Tilden-Hayes....am I right?

[JerseySean]

I was always under the impression that the vote in the house is "individual" not by state...
Tilden-Hayes....am I right?

Apples and oranges. That was a deal that would remove troops from the south in exchange for the vote. Can mojo help on this?

[Jujubees2]

I love Lincoln Chafee (he's actually one of the few Republicans I have voted for).

Former GOP senator calls Palin a 'cocky wacko' (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26661483/)

[JerseySean]

I love Lincoln Chafee (he's actually one of the few Republicans I have voted for).

Former GOP senator calls Palin a 'cocky wacko' (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26661483/)

Look, I am more of a moderate/liberal Republican, but Chafee is a cunt

[Jujubees2]

Look, I am more of a moderate/liberal Republican, but Chafee is a cunt

Why would you say that?

[TheMojoPin]

Apples and oranges. That was a deal that would remove troops from the south in exchange for the vote. Can mojo help on this?

The deal is considered to have a very possible reason behind the outcome of the election, but it's still rather cloudy as to whether or not such a specific deal existed. In all, that election was a huge mess, though it doesn't really set any kind of modern precedent.

[JerseySean]

The deal is considered to have a very possible reason behind the outcome of the election, but it's still rather cloudy as to whether or not such a specific deal existed. In all, that election was a huge mess, though it doesn't really set any kind of modern precedent.

But does it translate to 2008? my issue is that if you are the Democrat congresswoman from SD, how do you cast your vote for Obama, considering that McCain will win the state handily. What do you think Congress would do? My assumption is that they would go by electoral college states or by popular vote.

[Jujubees2]

According to the link below, each state gets one vote and their members of the House of Representatives decide who to cast the vote for.

It's also interesting that the Senate votes for the VP.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/electiontie.htm

[JerseySean]

According to the link below, each state gets one vote and their members of the House of Representatives decide who to cast the vote for.

It's also interesting that the Senate votes for the VP.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepoliticalsystem/a/electiontie.htm

I didnt know that. Amazing.

Mccain for President
Obama for VP. That would be fuckin nuts. It would guarantee Obama to be the next president

[foodcourtdruide]

But does it translate to 2008? my issue is that if you are the Democrat congresswoman from SD, how do you cast your vote for Obama, considering that McCain will win the state handily. What do you think Congress would do? My assumption is that they would go by electoral college states or by popular vote.

I'm not sure how an electoral college tie is handled, however this conversation reminds me of the superdelegate conversation. If a superdelegate represents a district that voted for Hillary over Obama, should that superdelegate vote along with their district?

I see both sides of the issue. The delegate is elected to represent their district as best they can at their own disgression, but at the same time the will of the people arguably has been made clear by the votes.

[JerseySean]

I'm not sure how an electoral college tie is handled, however this conversation reminds me of the superdelegate conversation. If a superdelegate represents a district that voted for Hillary over Obama, should that superdelegate vote along with their district?

I see both sides of the issue. The delegate is elected to represent their district as best they can at their own disgression, but at the same time the will of the people arguably has been made clear by the votes.

I think this is different than delegates though. This is not party rules, it is about a Constitutional crisis.

[foodcourtdruide]

I think this is different than delegates though. This is not party rules, it is about a Constitutional crisis.

Is it a crisis though? I mean, if there's a set rule for this how could it be a crisis? If it's on the books as jujubees stated, what would the issue be?

The members of the house casting votes would run into the same dilemma super delegates ran in too, whether to go with their personal choice or the will of their district.

[JerseySean]

Is it a crisis though? I mean, if there's a set rule for this how could it be a crisis? If it's on the books as jujubees stated, what would the issue be?

The members of the house casting votes would run into the same dilemma super delegates ran in too, whether to go with their personal choice or the will of their district.

But the stakes are higher. The political costs are higher. It would be a crisis. You would see recounts in every state. Omaha Nebraska would see more lawyers than citizens and our election system would yet again prove to be imperfect and seriously flawed. Florida 2000 was a debacle, but the outcome seemed to be the best one. What would happen here, who knows?

[foodcourtdruide]

But the stakes are higher. The political costs are higher. It would be a crisis. You would see recounts in every state. Omaha Nebraska would see more lawyers than citizens and our election system would yet again prove to be imperfect and seriously flawed. Florida 2000 was a debacle, but the outcome seemed to be the best one. What would happen here, who knows?

If you didn't see recounts in every state in 2000, why would you see recounts in every state if the electoral college tied? You may get recounts in close states, but why would New York recount if Obama wins by 15%? And so what if there are recounts? What's the big deal? It's amazing to me that as advanced as technology has become, voting technology is complete shit and often 25-30 years old.

As a democracy, shouldn't accurate elections be our top fucking priority? And shouldn't scrupulous scruitiny of election results be a gift and something we're proud of, rather than a burden?

The results of from Florida 2000 WERE a debacle, but even worse is that 8 years later we've learned nothing from them. The outcome was far from the best one, what occurred after the 2000 election should be called panic at best.

[JerseySean]

If you didn't see recounts in every state in 2000, why would you see recounts in every state if the electoral college tied? You may get recounts in close states, but why would New York recount if Obama wins by 15%? And so what if there are recounts? What's the big deal? It's amazing to me that as advanced as technology has become, voting technology is complete shit and often 25-30 years old.

As a democracy, shouldn't accurate elections be our top fucking priority? And shouldn't scrupulous scruitiny of election results be a gift and something we're proud of, rather than a burden?

The results of from Florida 2000 WERE a debacle, but even worse is that 8 years later we've learned nothing from them. The outcome was far from the best one, what occurred after the 2000 election should be called panic at best.

Obviously I meant every close state. There would have been more recounts in 2000 if it was closer. The problem is that New Mexico didnt matter because it wasnt enough to push Bush over the top.

[foodcourtdruide]

Obviously I meant every close state. There would have been more recounts in 2000 if it was closer. The problem is that New Mexico didnt matter because it wasnt enough to push Bush over the top.

Again, what is wrong with recounts? We've spent years focusing on the nonsense of this election, what's wrong with a few weeks figuring out the actual winner?

[JerseySean]

Again, what is wrong with recounts? We've spent years focusing on the nonsense of this election, what's wrong with a few weeks figuring out the actual winner?

Because in Florida, there was no actual winner. You could have counted those votes 11 and come out with 11 different results. It was a legal/political fight. Not a vote counting issue. I agree, we need to reform the election system here in this country.

[foodcourtdruide]

Because in Florida, there was no actual winner. You could have counted those votes 11 and come out with 11 different results. It was a legal/political fight. Not a vote counting issue. I agree, we need to reform the election system here in this country.

Hm, so you think there's absolutely no way this country could count 6,000,000 votes accurately? I disagree with that.

And we can go on for hours arguing the legal/political fight in Flroida 2000.

[JerseySean]

Hm, so you think there's absolutely no way this country could count 6,000,000 votes accurately? I disagree with that.

And we can go on for hours arguing the legal/political fight in Flroida 2000.

the issue in Florida was the standard on measuring voters intent.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/florida/story/679629.html

Interesting article.

[Recyclerz]

what would happen if there were a tie? coin toss?


It would go to the House of representatives. Then whoever wins the most state delegations in the house, would win. Right now Dems hold a 26-22 lead in delegations.

If the advertisements on my TV are to be believed, Kevin Costner now gets to decide. That must have been one of the footnotes of the Patriot Act that nobody in Congress read before passing it into law. D'oh!

[epo]

The Debates:

September 26, Presidential Debate on foreign policy
Moderator: Jim Lehrer
Location: University of Mississippi.

October 2, Vice Presidential Debate.
Moderator: Gwen Ifill
Location: Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri.

October 7, Presidential Debate, Town Hall Style
Moderator: Tom Brokaw
Location: Belmont University, Nashville, Tennessee.

October 15, Presidential Debate on domestic issues
Moderator: Bob Schieffer
Location: Hofstra University, Hempstead, New York.

[CousinDave]

The Debates:

October 7, Presidential Debate, Town Hall Style
Moderator: Tom Brokaw
Location: Belmont University, Nashville, Tennessee.



This one will be the final nail in Obama's coffin.

I hadn't ever heard that the candidates had agreed to any debates yet.

Serious money says Obama tries to get out of this one, change the format, or loses his voice that night.

Of the 3 this one will have the lowest number of viewers, so that was probably smart on Obama's (read his campaign's) part to have the town hall format in the middle when there won't be as many people watching.

[epo]

This one will be the final nail in Obama's coffin.

I hadn't ever heard that the candidates had agreed to any debates yet.

Serious money says Obama tries to get out of this one, change the format, or loses his voice that night.

Of the 3 this one will have the lowest number of viewers, so that was probably smart on Obama's (read his campaign's) part to have the town hall format in the middle when there won't be as many people watching.

Actually I've gotta disagree with you as you assume that a town hall debate will be a "final nail". There is no proof that this is an advantage or disadvantage as Senator Obama has quietly been doing town hall meetings with voters over the past 4-5 months on the campaign trail.

[JerseySean]

Actually I've gotta disagree with you as you assume that a town hall debate will be a "final nail". There is no proof that this is an advantage or disadvantage as Senator Obama has quietly been doing town hall meetings with voters over the past 4-5 months on the campaign trail.

But refused to do them with McCain

[epo]

But refused to do them with McCain

Which is a tired line from the McCain campaign. Honestly, we all know about these campaigns and McCain wanted to define Obama's campaign in location and tone with this offer.

I wouldn't have just declined the offer, but I would've told McCain to go fuck himself with it.

[CousinDave]

Actually I've gotta disagree with you as you assume that a town hall debate will be a "final nail". There is no proof that this is an advantage or disadvantage as Senator Obama has quietly been doing town hall meetings with voters over the past 4-5 months on the campaign trail.

Well he (Obama) doesn't get a teleprompter at any of the debates, he can't even have an ear piece with his advisers telling him what to say, he can't even bring in any note cards, all of which is really unfair for him, not to mention at best the audience will be neutral to him, oh yea he's also going to be debating a Republican who isn't running as a publicity stunt.

Look Obama is really good at reading out loud, I'm proud of him for this (I sure can't read out loud that well) and I hope that you are as well. I think he's just better suited for other lines of work. The guy that narrated movie trailers "In a world where..." recently died, this would be a really good job for Obama, one where I know he would excell at, and just think people would hear his voice and say, hey isn't that, that guy who ran for president that one time. Another good job for Obama, doing voice work for cartoons or reading audio books. I understand the guy is into public service, so I think a perfect job for him would be reading books to children at the local library.

Oh I blame Jerri Ryan for all of this nonsense we're having to deal with. In general I think the 90's were pretty good with a Dem in the White House and Republicans controlling the Congress, and had hoped we could get back there, although it would have been nice to try with a real Republican in the White House and Republicans controlling the Congress, unfortunately we got George W Bush instead. Obama is just unacceptable under any circumstances (and no its not because he's half black) and none of us would have ever heard of Barack Obama but for Jerri Ryan.

[epo]

Well he (Obama) doesn't get a teleprompter at any of the debates, he can't even have an ear piece with his advisers telling him what to say, he can't even bring in any note cards, all of which is really unfair for him, not to mention at best the audience will be neutral to him, oh yea he's also going to be debating a Republican who isn't running as a publicity stunt.

Look Obama is really good at reading out loud, I'm proud of him for this (I sure can't read out loud that well) and I hope that you are as well. I think he's just better suited for other lines of work. The guy that narrated movie trailers "In a world where..." recently died, this would be a really good job for Obama, one where I know he would excell at, and just think people would hear his voice and say, hey isn't that, that guy who ran for president that one time. Another good job for Obama, doing voice work for cartoons or reading audio books. I understand the guy is into public service, so I think a perfect job for him would be reading books to children at the local library.

Oh I blame Jerri Ryan for all of this nonsense we're having to deal with. In general I think the 90's were pretty good with a Dem in the White House and Republicans controlling the Congress, and had hoped we could get back there, although it would have been nice to try with a real Republican in the White House and Republicans controlling the Congress, unfortunately we got George W Bush instead. Obama is just unacceptable under any circumstances (and no its not because he's half black) and none of us would have ever heard of Barack Obama but for Jerri Ryan.

Could you possibly be any more insulting and condescending?

[CousinDave]

Could you possibly be any more insulting and condescending?

Why yes, yes I can.

But seriously I find the whole Obama Phenomenon to be insulting and condescending and I really pity all the people who are buying into the hype surrounding him, because either way they will be seriously let down, if he loses all their dreams, hope and other nonsense will be crushed because he lost, and if he wins, they'll find him to be just like any other politician - a fraud. Its like when you're a kid and you first find out Santa Claus is really your drunk uncle in a red padded suit and fake beard - all this time you were lied to. Now multiply that by 40 to 50 million.

I personally have nothing against the man and he's probably really an honorable guy, but that's only because I can separate the man from the politician and the real man from the public persona that has been built up by the media and his handlers, although at times I question whether he believes the hype himself. I doubt he does, and I hope he doesn't, but I do have problems with him playing pied piper. I realize its probably an intoxicating feeling that very few will ever experience and its probably the most difficult feeling to give up, but politics based on personality is never a good thing, through which no good can ever come.

[NewYorkDragons80]

Which is a tired line from the McCain campaign. Honestly, we all know about these campaigns and McCain wanted to define Obama's campaign in location and tone with this offer.

I wouldn't have just declined the offer, but I would've told McCain to go fuck himself with it.
Yeah! Fuck anyone who wants to debate Obama! The nerve!!!

http://www.tvgasm.com/newsgasm/MommieDearest.jpg

NO TOWN HALL DEBATES EVER!!!!!!

[CousinDave]

Which is a tired line from the McCain campaign. Honestly, we all know about these campaigns and McCain wanted to define Obama's campaign in location and tone with this offer.

I wouldn't have just declined the offer, but I would've told McCain to go fuck himself with it.


And it really helped Obama to decline McCain's offer.

If I was McCain, I would have had an empty chair on the stage during those Town Hall events.

One reason why Obama will lose big, is because he only wants to talk to "friendly" audiences.

Hey Barack, preaching to the choir never increases the size of the congregation!

Notice Barack didn't go on Bill O'Reilly until the campaign was at the "oh shit, we're going to lose!" stage. Didn't John Kerry say he thought he would have won in 2004 if he would have gone on the O'Reilly Show? Say what you want about Bill O'Reilly, (he's a piece of shit who locked Uncle Ted, a claustrophobic, in a coffin for laughs) but he carries a lot of weight when it comes to swing voters.

This is why you can not have your top campaign advisers, strategists, and managers with any political ideology, they don't think straight. You hire non partisan professionals. Dick Morris worked for Jesse Helms and Trent Lott at the same time he was working for Bill Clinton.

[YourAmishDaddy]

One reason why Obama will lose big, is because he only wants to talk to "friendly" audiences.

Hey Barack, preaching to the choir never increases the size of the congregation!

All this would be valid the minute I see Sarah Palin out and about in a crowd where actual people can ask her actual questions. And we know what happens when McCain goes out in these real people type crowds too. He gets booed at immigration rallies, and tells how it's too much for Americans to work picking lettuce for 50 dollars an hour.

[NewYorkDragons80]

All this would be valid the minute I see Sarah Palin out and about in a crowd where actual people can ask her actual questions. And we know what happens when McCain goes out in these real people type crowds too. He gets booed at immigration rallies, and tells how it's too much for Americans to work picking lettuce for 50 dollars an hour.
But he does it. He went to Columbia on Thursday and told them he supported restoring ROTC on campus and got booed, Obama said the exact same thing and didn't get booed.

[YourAmishDaddy]

But he does it. He went to Columbia on Thursday and told them he supported restoring ROTC on campus and got booed, Obama said the exact same thing and didn't get booed.

And ultimately that just tells us he's really not very liked. The only thing keeping McCain going right now is the fact Palin is there.

Which that will change when she finally gets examined by the public.

[NewYorkDragons80]

And ultimately that just tells us he's really not very liked. The only thing keeping McCain going right now is the fact Palin is there.
Is Columbia an accurate representation of popularity nationwide? I don't mean to sound anti-intellectual, but Columbia is the most elitist school in America. Their opinions don't even reflect the sentiment in New York City.

I was saying that Obama does well with audiences who already have their minds made up, and refuses to speak elsewhere. He does not take risks the way McCain takes risks.

[YourAmishDaddy]

John McCain was booed at a conservative rally in Livonia Michigan. Cmon.

Even die hard conservatives hate McCain. Always have. They call the guy McAmnesty for Chrissakes, lol

[TheMojoPin]

He does not take risks the way McCain takes risks.

Taking pointlessly stupid risks isn't a good thing.

Which is not say all of his "risks" are that.

[NewYorkDragons80]

John McCain was booed at a conservative rally in Livonia Michigan. Cmon.

Even die hard conservatives hate McCain. Always have. They call the guy McAmnesty for Chrissakes, lol
You're right. If you want to fault him for arguing the immigrants are human beings who deserve access to the citizenship process, then fault him all you want. They're going to vote for him anyway, so their xenophobia will be for naught.

Mojo, I don't think making a stand at Columbia for ROTC was a stupid risk. What pointless risk are you referring to?

[YourAmishDaddy]

You're right. If you want to fault him for arguing the immigrants are human beings who deserve access to the citizenship process, then fault him all you want. They're going to vote for him anyway, so their xenophobia will be for naught.

I do fault him by taking an oath to defend the Constitution, then not upholding it by allowing people who obviously don't care about our system of law to freely enter here at will to get the reward of fastracking their way into citizenship.

First off I have no problems with immigrants. Immigrants come here everyday. And they do it the right way by applying and doing the work involved in becoming a citizen.

Coming here illegally is taking all of that and throwing it away. Where by hook or by crook someone can just come here, no matter their background and in essence achieve their American dream by burglary.

And you're right. The typical so called conservative that hates him will probably more often than not vote for him. Another reason I left the Republican Party. Because anyone that has that little respect for their opinions and principles I don't want to be associated with.

[NewYorkDragons80]

I do fault him by taking an oath to defend the Constitution, then not upholding it by allowing people who obviously don't care about our system of law to freely enter here at will to get the reward of fastracking their way into citizenship.
Realists understand that there is no practical way to deport the 12 million people already here, so what McCain-Kennedy would have done was open the path to citizenship for the people living in the US, while securing the borders to control the influx of new immigrants. It also would've established English as the official language. There is nothing prudent or wise about trying to crack down on 12 million participants in our society, and people need to grow up and stop calling legislation that gives them some kind of legal status "protecting lawbreakers". Spare me. The only difference between what Mexicans are doing now and what immigrants were doing 100 years ago is the color of skin and the xenophobic scapegoat laws that came in between.

[Jujubees2]

And it really helped Obama to decline McCain's offer.

If I was McCain, I would have had an empty chair on the stage during those Town Hall events.

One reason why Obama will lose big, is because he only wants to talk to "friendly" audiences.

Wasn't that what Bush did in 2004? Seemed to work for him.

[epo]

Tomorrow on Good Morning America Senator Obama on the town hall offer from Senator McCain:

This whole thing about town halls I think is a little bit of a gimmick. . . The reason that we're not talking about the issues doesn't have to do with the fact that we didn't have town halls. The reason that we're not talking about the issues is because John McCain has shown a lack of interest in talking about the issues. That's how their campaign's been run.

I like the new tone.

[AKA]

I like the new tone.

Me too - I feel that the Obama Campaign let the 'seeds have their little bump, but now he's going to show McCain that winning a "news cycle" might not end being such a big win when people (and the media) begin to wise up and call lies when they see them. At least I hope so.

Remember, right after Super Tuesday an internal Obama memo was leaked where it showed a state by state assessment of how well they would do against Clinton, and they pretty much ran the table of calling it. They are better organized on the ground - well funded - have actually issues on their side - and the rightful claim to "change" - I have to think that internally they all have seen the script for the next 8 weeks, and know what the fuck they are doing.

Palin may have surprised them, but I'm guessing they suspected all along for McCain to go for "The Rove" attacks in the final 2 months.

John McCain was booed at a conservative rally in Livonia Michigan. Cmon.

The weekend after Sarah Palin was announced (right before the convention) a friend of mine was at a county fair in rural Pennsylvania. He said he was stunned when the people at the "rodeo" asked who were McCain supporters in the audience, there were a few claps and a lot of boos, but when later they asked the same thing about Obama it was almost thunderous.

Now, this was two weeks ago, which might as well be 2 years ago, so who knows where things are now (it very well might be evened up), but if the scales can fall off peoples eyes and see McCain/Palin as Bush III, every pundunt in the world may have to eat a dick the day after the election if Bill Clinton's prediction that Obama will win big comes to fruition.

[epo]

Palin may have surprised them, but I'm guessing they suspected all along for McCain to go for "The Rove" attacks in the final 2 months.


Funny you mention Rove. Here is his take on the current McCain tone:

Well, McCain has gone in some of his ads -- similarly gone one step too far, and sort of attributing to Obama things that are, you know, beyond the 100-percent-truth test.

or on video...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/llg36oqfl4s&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/llg36oqfl4s&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Is it a bad sign when Rove basically admits that you are a liar?

[NewYorkDragons80]

Tomorrow on Good Morning America Senator Obama on the town hall offer from Senator McCain
What happened to the Obama who said (http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/story?id=4999288&page=1) "Oh, we're definitely going to be doing some town hall debates,"

Aw shucks... I miss the old Obama who wasn't just about the politics as usual.

[HBox]

What happened to the Obama who said (http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/story?id=4999288&page=1)

Aw shucks... I miss the old Obama who wasn't just about the politics as usual.

Look, sure, it would be great if there were a bunch of town halls. There should have been some at some point. However when McCain asked for them was only a gimmick. Days after Obama wins the nomination. He has to transition to the national campaign when McCain had months to do so already. It would have been great to do some later. It didn't happen and would have been great. Ok. Shame on Obama.

However, for McCain to use this as an excuse for his disgusting, lying campaigning is laughable. What he is basically saying is Obama didn't give me what I want, and now I'm going to take a tantrum like a petulant child. John McCain is a man and is running the campaign he chose to run. The responsibility for it lies at his feet and his feet alone.

[NewYorkDragons80]

[color=navy][size=2]Look, sure, it would be great if there were a bunch of town halls. There should have been some at some point. However when McCain asked for them was only a gimmick. Days after Obama wins the nomination. He has to transition to the national campaign when McCain had months to do so already. It would have been great to do some later. It didn't happen and would have been great. Ok. Shame on Obama.
I don't think the offer of side by side town hall debates was a calculated move to catch Obama off his guard while his campaign was in its nascent stages. Obama had been running since February of 2007, so it's not like he was reinventing the wheel or hadn't had a chance to prepare for the possibility of getting the nom. Florida and Michigan aside, he knew it was his for months prior. Even if he didn't, what adaptations needed to be made that would have been hindered by a town hall debate? Did Barry ever consider saying "Thanks for the offer, but I just got the nomination so it'll be a month or so before the first town hall." Why are you saying it and he didn't?

As for the negative campaign, it has gradually degraded to this point and both sides are guilty of lying about the other. I'm honest enough to admit it to myself, but I'm sticking with the guy I've been behind for almost a decade now. Fuck voting records, if you think he's a 3rd term of Bush, then someone needs to check your papers.

[YourAmishDaddy]

So Obama was awarded the nomination the last week in August. Before which, he was in a race against Hillary. Which was essentially a tie.

So basically are you asking is while he was in the race against Hillary he should have been debating McCain as well. When he didn't even officially have the nomination?

Now that he has won the nomination I believe there are at least three opportunities to debate. In whatever form they're using. As usual.

So what's the issue?

[YourAmishDaddy]

Fuck voting records, if you think he's a 3rd term of Bush, then someone needs to check your papers.

Of course, voting records don't matter, right? Let's not let facts cloud the issue. On the most key and critical issues time after time after time McCain has been on the same side of all of it with Bush.

And I'm sure if he's elected, like we've been headed since 9-11, someone will be checking our papers. Often. Whenever we decide to go anywhere.

[foodcourtdruide]

I don't think the offer of side by side town hall debates was a calculated move to catch Obama off his guard while his campaign was in its nascent stages. Obama had been running since February of 2007, so it's not like he was reinventing the wheel or hadn't had a chance to prepare for the possibility of getting the nom. Florida and Michigan aside, he knew it was his for months prior. Even if he didn't, what adaptations needed to be made that would have been hindered by a town hall debate? Did Barry ever consider saying "Thanks for the offer, but I just got the nomination so it'll be a month or so before the first town hall." Why are you saying it and he didn't?

As for the negative campaign, it has gradually degraded to this point and both sides are guilty of lying about the other. I'm honest enough to admit it to myself, but I'm sticking with the guy I've been behind for almost a decade now. Fuck voting records, if you think he's a 3rd term of Bush, then someone needs to check your papers.

Will you admit that McCain has initiated the negative campaigning? Primarily with his comment regarding Obama willing to lose a war to win an election? That happened relatively early.

[thejives]

McCain's campaign is purposely trying to run a dirty campaign. They know they lose a clean campaign.

I don't think it's up for debate whether he is. His campaign has pretty much acknowledged that that's their strategy.

The question is, how do you fight that kind of campaign?

[Zorro]

Will you admit that McCain has initiated the negative campaigning? Primarily with his comment regarding Obama willing to lose a war to win an election? That happened relatively early.

actually I think it started with Obama saying McCain wanted a 100 year war in Iraq

[brettmojo]

actually I think it started with Obama saying McCain wanted a 100 year war in Iraq
That's not negative, that's just true.

[scottinnj]

That's not negative, that's just true.

The statement was true, the meaning was not. Sort of like how McCain turned "lipstick on a pig" into a media lie.

[Dude!]

McCain's campaign is purposely trying to run a dirty campaign. They know they lose a clean campaign.

I don't think it's up for debate whether he is. His campaign has pretty much acknowledged that that's their strategy.

The question is, how do you fight that kind of campaign?

how do you fight it...you just lie

like you promise to take federal funding to run your campaign
and then break that pledge

and tell the public that 90% of people will get a tax cut
when only 40% actually pay taxes

all politicians lie and and run dirty campaigns and generally suck
why does everyone pretend obama is any different

ill take the rezko real estate windfall any day
obama made out real nice on that
he is just like the rest

[thejives]

actually I think it started with Obama saying McCain wanted a 100 year war in Iraq

That was during the democratic debate in California, and he had that great line about the "wheels coming off the straight talk express." McCain was being a real jerk to that questioner, and he deserved to have to reiterate his explanation about "as long as no Americans are being killed."

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VFknKVjuyNk&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VFknKVjuyNk&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I mean really ... interrupting with "make it 100," and then saying "That's fine with me and I hope it's OK with you." Total dick answer. That exchange was fair game.

[epo]

how do you fight it...you just lie

like you promise to take federal funding to run your campaign
and then break that pledge

and tell the public that 90% of people will get a tax cut
when only 40% actually pay taxes

all politicians lie and and run dirty campaigns and generally suck
why does everyone pretend obama is any different

ill take the rezko real estate windfall any day
obama made out real nice on that
he is just like the rest

Or you could be McCain and have broken the law you wrote on campaign finances in November. But then again, we can do this shit all day...can't we Keating Five?

[Dude!]

Or you could be McCain and have broken the law you wrote on campaign finances in November. But then again, we can do this shit all day...can't we Keating Five?

yes you can
and that is the point
you almost gotta be corrupt in politics it seems
mccain obama
neither one has a right to be holier than thou

[thejives]

yes you can
and that is the point
you almost gotta be corrupt in politics it seems
mccain obama
neither one has a right to be holier than thou

I like the way dude posts in free verse.

[Dude!]

I like the way dude posts in free verse.

free verse
is my kryptonite
for success

[thejives]

Ha!

Dude, I get your point. But seriously, Obama will be a much better president.

McCain will be the same as Bush from day 1. Literally. He's hired the same guy who set up the Bush administration to set up his (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1840722,00.html).

Trust me, an anonymous but congenial person on the internet, when I tell you to vote Obama.

[NewYorkDragons80]

No, voting records DO matter. What isn't reflected is the fact that this administration has hardly failed from straight up policies. This admin is unpopular because of the corruption, cronyism, and ineptitude that has run rampant... THAT'S why Bushs popularity is dead and unlike all other lame-duck presidents, won't be coming back. McCain's role in countering the social network is largely not reflected in Senate votes. The Boeing tanker deal and Thundervision scandals are 2 examples that come to mind as I type this on the belt pkwy on my blackberry. It was the McCain office, not investigative journalists or pentagon acquisitions auditors, who initiated investigations into these scandals. These never came to vote in the Senate, but he used his authority to smoke out these hacks for the scum they were. What Senate Resolution called for Rumsfeld's resignation and a change of course in Iraq? Oh, that's right, there wasn't one. But the man in the arena stuck his neck out with some political risk for earning his own partys nomination.

[NewYorkDragons80]

The statement was true, the meaning was not. Sort of like how McCain turned "lipstick on a pig" into a media lie.
Lipstick on a pig was an old phrase, obviously. McCain has used it, and probably every pol has used it at some point or another. However, the environment in which Obama used it, it was directed squarely at Palin, who had just used her "lipstick" hockey mom line about a week earlier. I don't think it was sexist, and I think McCain's people pounced on it way too enthusiastically, but Obama's being a little bit too coy about his intentions in turning the phrase.

[NewYorkDragons80]

he deserved to have to reiterate his explanation about "as long as no Americans are being killed."
Should he? I mean, pretty much everybody got what he meant from the beginning. No Americans are being killed in Germany or Japan, so that's what he meant when he said 100 years. Which brings me to another point about McCain that his voting record doesn't show. At pretty much every point in this war, McCain has told us that we're going to have to make sacrifices in order to win it. Some are scoffing about McCain's comments that the war would be easy shortly before the invasion began. Well that came before the gross mismanagement of Iraq that fueled the insurgency. There's a frankness that McCain has displayed throughout this war that Bush never has. McCain has chosen to stake his entire political legacy on the outcome of this war, and he did so before he was ever expected to. Whether you agree with him or not, that's a tremendous departure from anything Bush has had to say on the matter.

[K.C.]

Or you could be McCain and have broken the law you wrote on campaign finances in November. But then again, we can do this shit all day...can't we Keating Five?

My favorite McCain-ism was when he was basically forced by his party, and complied, with saying he'd vote against the Immigration Bill he WROTE!!!!

What a fucking fraud.

[HBox]

Should he? I mean, pretty much everybody got what he meant from the beginning. No Americans are being killed in Germany or Japan, so that's what he meant when he said 100 years. Which brings me to another point about McCain that his voting record doesn't show. At pretty much every point in this war, McCain has told us that we're going to have to make sacrifices in order to win it. Some are scoffing about McCain's comments that the war would be easy shortly before the invasion began. Well that came before the gross mismanagement of Iraq that fueled the insurgency. There's a frankness that McCain has displayed throughout this war that Bush never has. McCain has chosen to stake his entire political legacy on the outcome of this war, and he did so before he was ever expected to. Whether you agree with him or not, that's a tremendous departure from anything Bush has had to say on the matter.

Then why doesn't he be clear and say he doesn't want the troops to leave Iraq or spell out the conditions under which he would need to let troops leave Iraq. Because according him either our troops being killed or our troops not being killed are equally good reasons to stay.

[badmonkey]

My favorite McCain-ism was when he was basically forced by his party, and complied, with saying he'd vote against the Immigration Bill he WROTE!!!!

What a fucking fraud.

Is that the Immigration Bill that he crossed party lines and co-wrote with Ted Kennedy and was never voted on because it failed to pass the cloture vote (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/immigration-bill-goes-down-in-defeat-2007-06-28.html) after Americans crashed the phone systems with the volume of calls protesting the bill (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/28/immigration-measure-causes-senate-phone-lines-to-crash/)?

Cloture vote (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00235):

McCain (R-AZ), Yea
Obama (D-IL), Yea

[Jujubees2]

Is that the Immigration Bill that he crossed party lines and co-wrote with Ted Kennedy and was never voted on because it failed to pass the cloture vote (http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/immigration-bill-goes-down-in-defeat-2007-06-28.html) after Americans crashed the phone systems with the volume of calls protesting the bill (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/06/28/immigration-measure-causes-senate-phone-lines-to-crash/)?

Cloture vote (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00235):

So he's a flip-flopper now?

[badmonkey]

So he's a flip-flopper now?

How does voting for end to debate on a bill so that they can vote on whether to enact it make him a flip flopper?

[K.C.]

So he's a flip-flopper now?

Exactly.

Flip! Flop! Flip! Flop!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/M34KKaczvKg&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M34KKaczvKg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[K.C.]

How does voting for end to debate on a bill so that they can vote on whether to enact it make him a flip flopper?

Watch the video clip.

[badmonkey]

Exactly.

Flip! Flop! Flip! Flop!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/M34KKaczvKg&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/M34KKaczvKg&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

I see the straws you're grasping at and just like your original post I replied to, you're wrong. He stated in your video that his bill will not come to a vote because it is not what the American people want. Would Obama vote for that bill today?

[Jujubees2]

I see the straws you're grasping at and just like your original post I replied to, you're wrong. He stated in your video that his bill will not come to a vote because it is not what the American people want. Would Obama vote for that bill today?

But I thought Republicans governed by their guts and not by what is "popular".

Last I checked, a majority of people were against the war in Iraq. So if McCain is elected, he should pull the troops out since it's what the American people want.

[K.C.]

I see the straws you're grasping at and just like your original post I replied to, you're wrong. He stated in your video that his bill will not come to a vote because it is not what the American people want. Would Obama vote for that bill today?

It's HIS bill. He wrote, he believes it.

He changed his stance because he couldn't win the Republican primary being perceived too soft on Immigration.

There's other clips of him flat out saying he would not vote on his own bill from other debates. I'll have to dig them up later.

But the bottom line is that McCain defended and danced around it until he was called on it on National Television, and he caved.

So much for Mr. Maverick Straight Talk.



As for Obama, I believe he's said he'd vote for as late as the Democratic Primary Debates.

[CousinDave]

Would Obama vote for that bill today?


PRESENT




Although to be fair, Obama won't even be their to vote 'present', because he's to busy campaigning for another office - same with McCain, I think McCain has missed even more votes in the Senate than Obama.

Here's an idea if you want to run for another office while you currently hold an elected office, you must first resign from your current office.

[AKA]

Palin camp clarifies extent of Iraq trip (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/09/13/palin_camp_clarifies_extent_of_iraq_trip/)

http://cache.boston.com/resize/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2008/09/12/1221270776_1583/539w.jpg

Following her selection last month as John McCain's running mate, aides said Palin had traveled to Ireland, Germany, Kuwait, and Iraq to meet with members of the Alaska National Guard. During that trip she was said to have visited a "military outpost" inside Iraq. The campaign has since repeated that Palin's foreign travel included an excursion into the Iraq battle zone.

If we've learned nothing else this election cycle is that the Republicans are lying sacks of shit - something many have known for awhile.

I hope the "liberal" media tears into this the same way they (rightly so) went after Hillary and her "sniper fire" comments last spring - or how they went after Kerry on if he went into Cambodia 4 years ago - and then Gore and things he actually never even said (like inventing the internet) back in 2000.

[Zorro]

Palin camp clarifies extent of Iraq trip (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/09/13/palin_camp_clarifies_extent_of_iraq_trip/)

http://cache.boston.com/resize/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2008/09/12/1221270776_1583/539w.jpg



If we've learned nothing else this election cycle is that the Republicans are lying sacks of shit - something many have known for awhile.

I hope the "liberal" media tears into this the same way they (rightly so) went after Hillary and her "sniper fire" comments last spring - or how they went after Kerry on if he went into Cambodia 4 years ago - and then Gore and things he actually never even said (like inventing the internet) back in 2000.

I'm glad we're getting back to the real issues...

[badmonkey]

It's HIS bill. He wrote, he believes it.

He changed his stance because he couldn't win the Republican primary being perceived too soft on Immigration.

There's other clips of him flat out saying he would not vote on his own bill from other debates. I'll have to dig them up later.

But the bottom line is that McCain defended and danced around it until he was called on it on National Television, and he caved.

So much for Mr. Maverick Straight Talk.



As for Obama, I believe he's said he'd vote for as late as the Democratic Primary Debates.

Over 70% of the country wants something done about immigration, which is the same percentage of the country that did not support that bill. The bill would not pass regardless. That's why they crashed the phone system in protest. You can't vote on a bill that is so controversial to the people you represent that it can't even get out of debate for a vote. It wasn't even close to a vote along party lines. It was written bi-partisan, it was debated bi-partisan, and it was defeated by protest of the American people. Of course he's going to defend his effort, but it was a failed bill by him and Kennedy. Was that his fault or Kennedy's or was it both or was it just too much compromise from both sides into a crappy bill?

Why the Senate Immigration Bill Failed (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/why_the_senate_immigration_bill_failed)

[CousinDave]

Palin didn't say any of that.

Hillary said she was in sniper fire when CBS video tape proved otherwise, John Kerry wrote that he was in Cambodia at the time he was actually in Washington DC, and Al Gore was taken out of context when he said he invented the internet.

The personal attacks on Palin don't work, try attacking her on political issues.

For years the Democrats have only won on personality, while the Republicans lose on personality, the Democrats lose on issues, and the Republicans have won on issues.

Now the Republicans are trying to win on personality, so the Democrats have to adopt a new strategy.

[K.C.]

Over 70% of the country wants something done about immigration, which is the same percentage of the country that did not support that bill. The bill would not pass regardless. That's why they crashed the phone system in protest. You can't vote on a bill that is so controversial to the people you represent that it can't even get out of debate for a vote. It wasn't even close to a vote along party lines. It was written bi-partisan, it was debated bi-partisan, and it was defeated by protest of the American people. Of course he's going to defend his effort, but it was a failed bill by him and Kennedy. Was that his fault or Kennedy's or was it both or was it just too much compromise from both sides into a crappy bill?

Why the Senate Immigration Bill Failed (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/immigration/why_the_senate_immigration_bill_failed)


I don't disagree with any of that.

And if McCain had said that after the cloture vote, it wouldn't be an issue.

But he didn't. He was steadfast in his position until the primary season kicked off, and Mitt Romney in particular, started killing him on his immigration policy.

That's when he gradually evolved his position from supporting Kennedy/McCain, to 'we need to fix certain aspects of it' to 'I would not vote for my bill.'


And I don't really care about that so much. I understand the game of politics. I just hate that people give him that Maverick label. He's not a Maverick and he never was. He's always been a fiscal conservative and he's always been in strong support of defense spending.

He's a guy who breaks with his party every so often on particular issues.

That doesn't make him a Maverick. That makes him sane.

Everyone should have that on their resume at some point. The people who never break are the ones who are questionable.