President-Elect Obama Thread

[PapaBear]

The kitties registered fake individuals to vote.
That was Acorny one!

[Recyclerz]

Happens all the time. TC, LA, MS, AL all do the same thing. That is standard practice in this country. Moreover in oil country, if you belong to a condominium association or designated housing development and they find oil, all members of that development are entitled to royalties.

So you are saying that the US of A is already a socialist country (i.e. that resources are communally owned in certain left-wing locales like AK, LA, MS & AL)? Sir, you go too far and I must challenge you to a duel. Supersoakers at ten paces.

But not at daybreak because I like to sleep in on my days off. :wink:

[brettmojo]

Why should it? He didnt say anything other than bullshit political rhetoric to appeal to the lowest common denominator of the public. I find it amazing that any of you think hes anything other than a socialist since hes going to shut down or cripple quite a few small business owners.

If he gets in and if his policies get enacted we will deal with a depression for years to come.
Yup, because trickle-down economics have worked out so well up to this point.

All those CEOs with hundred million dollar "golden parachutes" would agree.

[Furtherman]

For anyone who wants to see what the real Socialist party thinks about Obama (or anyone who needs to brush up on what socialism truly is), tune into the Colbert Report tonight, he'll have the candidate running on the Socialist ticket and he'll let us know what he thinks of Obama.

[spoon]

McCain is saying that people who have more should pay a bit more. But those rates shouldnt go up. McCain is saying that middle class needs relief....even today. By the way, to me she looks liks an ass girl. Anyone else getting that?

Since this is from BEFORE the W tax cuts, he then agrees to take them away?! Come on man, your spin is so lacking.

[JerseySean]

Ms. MonCrief testified that in November 2007 Project Vote development director Karyn Gillette told her she had direct contact with the Obama campaign and had obtained their donor lists. Ms. MonCrief also testified she was given a spreadsheet to use in cultivating Obama donors who had maxed out on donations to the candidate, but who could contribute to voter registration efforts.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122533169940482893.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

[EliSnow]

If he gets in and if his policies get enacted we will deal with a depression for years to come.

Okay, these are the kinds of statements that drive me absolutely nuts, regardless of whether it's said about Obama or McCain.

You don't know what will happen if Obama or McCain gets elected. You can say that a long depression is more likely to happen with Obama and his policies, but given the fluidity and complexity of our lives, society and economy, no one can say that something will definitely happen if either is elected.

I've heard people on the other side say that if McCain is elected, we'll have depression and war, and that's just as ridiculous.

Even if you were an economic expert you couldn't state that Obama will lead to depression will definitely happen.

[AKA]

Okay, these are the kinds of statements that drive me absolutely nuts, regardless of whether it's said about Obama or McCain.

You don't know what will happen if Obama or McCain gets elected. You can say that a long depression is more likely to happen with Obama and his policies, but given the fluidity and complexity of our lives, society and economy, no one can say that something will definitely happen if either is elected.

I've heard people on the other side say that if McCain is elected, we'll have depression and war, and that's just as ridiculous.

Even if you were an economic expert you couldn't state that Obama will lead to depression will definitely happen.


True - but some naysayers look better, and better with time. (http://www.publicwitnessmovie.com)

[EliSnow]

True - but some naysayers look better, and better with time. (http://www.publicwitnessmovie.com)

I can't view this, so I have no way to react.

[Zorro]

In the last 24 hours I have received 16 cell calls from Obama campaigners 1) reminding me to vote on Tuesday 2) An offer to go to PA and help get out the vote. ...I plan to vote for the guy but stop already.

[JerseySean]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE49T76620081030?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Al-Queada want the GOP to be embarrased

[GreatAmericanZero]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE49T76620081030?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Al-Queada want the GOP to be embarrased

now explain what this has to do with Obama

[mikeyboy]

now explain what this has to do with Obama

Don't you get it? If Obama wins, the terrorists win!!!!!


Ugh.

[JerseySean]

Don't you get it? If Obama wins, the terrorists win!!!!!


Ugh.

Apparently theyll be happy

[Furtherman]

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE49T76620081030?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&rpc=22&sp=true

Al-Queada want the GOP to be embarrased


Really? Is this all you have left? What some savages think? Wow... you are thinking... Just. Like. Them.




I don't give a shit what Al-Qaeda wants.


And neither should you.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Really? Is this all you have left? What some savages think? Wow... you are thinking... Just. Like. Them.




I don't give a shit what Al-Qaeda wants.


And neither should you.

He cares cuz he shares the same goals but is too stupid to realize it

[JerseySean]

Really? Is this all you have left? What some savages think? Wow... you are thinking... Just. Like. Them.




I don't give a shit what Al-Qaeda wants.


And neither should you.

I dont, but I just think that it is up to Americans to make up their minds. Al-Queda clearly doesnt want President McCain, what does America want....We will see.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

I dont, but I just think that it is up to Americans to make up their minds. Al-Queda clearly doesnt want President McCain, what does America want....We will see.

Yes, because you can read their minds. And know anything about them. Or their long-term goals.

You're just a guy on a messageboard and so is everyone else here. Nobody here knows dick about dick. Oh well.

Opinions and assholes, right?

[mikeyboy]

I dont, but I just think that it is up to Americans to make up their minds. Al-Queda clearly doesnt want President McCain, what does America want....We will see.

...and you think this is relevant to their decision making process?

[brettmojo]

I dont, but I just think that it is up to Americans to make up their minds. Al-Queda clearly doesnt want President McCain, what does America want....We will see.
Yeah, a president that would continue George W. Bush's warmongering ways and isolationist foreign policy wouldn't benefit them in anyway.

[celery]

I dont, but I just think that it is up to Americans to make up their minds. Al-Queda clearly doesnt want President McCain, what does America want....We will see.

They're murderers and religious fanatics. They killed 3000 Americans on 9/11. You're seriously trusting what they say in a video?

[JerseySean]

They're murderers and religious fanatics. They killed 3000 Americans on 9/11. You're seriously trusting what they say in a video?

I dont trust them, but they that they dont want McCain. I dont want to vote the way al-Quada wants me to.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Note his use of literary devices in his argument patterns. He says something controversial, someone responds "HEy!" then he says "I'm not something something, but I just blah blah blah". Usually he just finds something funny, then another masturbatory catch-phrase. Bo-ring, unimaginative, unconvincing. You ain't getting elected anytime are ya, Chief?

[JerseySean]

...and you think this is relevant to their decision making process?

Yes it will hurt Obama

[CofyCrakCocaine]

I dont trust them, but they that they dont want McCain. I dont want to vote the way al-Quada wants me to.

You're letting them decide for you then, and you're a coward. Thanks for the honesty.

[mikeyboy]

I dont trust them, but they that they dont want McCain. I dont want to vote the way al-Quada wants me to.

Would you say the same thing if Al Queda made it clear that they wanted McCain in office? Of course you wouldn't. Do deviate from your party line ever? I like political deiscussions on this board when people can be objective and rational. You never seem to post anything that deviates even slightly from a heavy republican spin.

[epo]

I dont, but I just think that it is up to Americans to make up their minds. Al-Queda clearly doesnt want President McCain, what does America want....We will see.

That's because John McCain has a "secret plan" to get Osama bin Laden! Don't you understand, ONLY he can do it!

I'll tell you what, IF McCain really knew how to get bin Laden unlike Bush, he'd tell Bush and truly put "Country First".

[celery]

I dont trust them, but they that they dont want McCain. I dont want to vote the way al-Quada wants me to.

Yes it will hurt Obama

I picture him crying and shaking behind the keyboard as he's typing this.

He's really losing it if this is all he has left.

5 more days to go.

[mikeyboy]

Yes it will hurt Obama

Not my question. My question is whether you think this is a relevant factor in making a decison. You indicated in another post that you didn't want to vote the way Al Queda wants you to. This is just silly.

[epo]

Yes it will hurt Obama

It might matter IF the republicans actually made the "war on terror" a priority the last 6 years.

[JerseySean]

Would you say the same thing if Al Queda made it clear that they wanted McCain in office? Of course you wouldn't. Do deviate from your party line ever? I like political deiscussions on this board when people can be objective and rational. You never seem to post anything that deviates even slightly from a heavy republican spin.

Oh, come on this is just fun watching everyone go mad. I have many times deviated from my party like mikey. I am not a conservative, but horserace wise, dont put McCain to bed yet.

[mikeyboy]

Would you say the same thing if Al Queda made it clear that they wanted McCain in office? Of course you wouldn't.

Actually, I figured out what your spin would be if Al Queda made it clear that they didn't want Obama in office. You would say that they are terrorists, so you can't take them at their word, so their statements mean that they really want Obama in office. Therefore you should vote McCain to show those terrorists!

[CofyCrakCocaine]

He's just a psuedo-intellectual hack with a keyboard. I'm convinced now that people are actually responding to his arguments because there's some odd joy in it. I'm more old-fashioned and believe in ending a retarded fight quick.

Actually trying to comprehend him and his blubbering is simple masochism.

And Jsean, we would agree to disagree with SOME of your points, but most of the things you say are retarded half-insults geared at deliberately annoying people because, as you just admitted, you jerk off when people respond to you. Need attention much?

[yojimbo7248]

Nicholas Kristof had an op-ed piece in last Sunday's NYT arguing that Al Qaeda would prefer McCain. Here is the gist:

An American president who keeps troops in Iraq indefinitely, fulminates about Islamic terrorism, inclines toward military solutions and antagonizes other nations is an excellent recruiting tool. In contrast, an African-American president with a Muslim grandfather and a penchant for building bridges rather than blowing them up would give Al Qaeda recruiters fits.

Here is a link to the full article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26kristof.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Of course, there are people who will put their hands over their ears and go "lalalala" when they hear "NYTimes" but he does present a strong argument, in my opinion.

[JerseySean]

He's just a psuedo-intellectual hack with a keyboard. I'm convinced now that people are actually responding to his arguments because there's some odd joy in it. I'm more old-fashioned and believe in ending a retarded fight quick.

Actually trying to comprehend him and his blubbering is simple masochism.

And Jsean, we would agree to disagree with SOME of your points, but most of the things you say are retarded half-insults geared at deliberately annoying people because, as you just admitted, you jerk off when people respond to you. Need attention much?

Honestly, this board politically, is an Obama love fest. I havent seen one bad thing about Obama from Mojo, epo, etc. Ive said when McCain and Palin have been wrong but I havent seen it from the others. Just because one disagrees, doesnt mean Im wrong. there have been plenty of patronizing posts towards McCain and Palin which are on the level of what I say about Obama. But you guys dont see it that way because its funny the other way. Not insulting or patronizing.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Nicholas Kristof had an op-ed piece in last Sunday's NYT arguing that Al Qaeda would prefer McCain. Here is the gist:

An American president who keeps troops in Iraq indefinitely, fulminates about Islamic terrorism, inclines toward military solutions and antagonizes other nations is an excellent recruiting tool. In contrast, an African-American president with a Muslim grandfather and a penchant for building bridges rather than blowing them up would give Al Qaeda recruiters fits.

Here is a link to the full article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/opinion/26kristof.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Of course, there are people who will put their hands over their ears and go "lalalala" when they hear "NYTimes" but he does present a strong argument, in my opinion.

Gathering on Yojimbo's lead, if you want to understand a little better what a terrorist technically is and what an ultra-conservative (terrorist) group's motivations and goals are, read http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/037541486X/interactiveda482-20

[GreatAmericanZero]

i think generally ignorant people...like at the local hayseed church bakesale..might fall for a tactic like "This is what al-queda is saying and therefore that can be constructed into a fear about Obama" but I think people that generally discuss politics on a messageboard of a pretty intelligent open-minded radio show (like i think R&F are)..i don't think any of us would fall for it. I think no matter what "side" you play on, you gotta see that

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Honestly, this board politically, is an Obama love fest. I havent seen one bad thing about Obama from Mojo, epo, etc. Ive said when McCain and Palin have been wrong but I havent seen it from the others. Just because one disagrees, doesnt mean Im wrong. there have been plenty of patronizing posts towards McCain and Palin which are on the level of what I say about Obama. But you guys dont see it that way because its funny the other way. Not insulting or patronizing.

I personally haven't licked Obama's ass one way or the other- I just think your style of making points is shit and unfunny and pretty hostile and overall dumb. Making predictions about what a presidential candidate is going to do as though it were definitive future-telling fact is what retards do which is partly why I don't jump onto anyone's bandwagon prematurely. Actions speak louder than words and there's been zero action from either candidate.

I agree on some level about this board being more liberal, but that goes with the territory. Don't expect you can walk into Egypt and wonder loudly why so many "savage people" have Bin Laden pictures in their homes. This place ain't Egypt and you can have your say here but "I just find it funny that" you then cry foul in a passive-aggressive manner when someone responds in a way you don't like.

[JerseySean]

I personally haven't licked Obama's ass one way or the other- I just think your style of making points is shit and unfunny and pretty hostile and overall dumb. Making predictions about what a presidential candidate is going to do as though it were definitive future-telling fact is what retards do which is partly why I don't jump onto anyone's bandwagon prematurely. Actions speak louder than words and there's been zero action from either candidate.

I agree on some level about this board being more liberal, but that goes with the territory. Don't expect you can walk into Egypt and wonder loudly why so many "savage people" have Bin Laden pictures in their homes. This place ain't Egypt and you can have your say here but "I just find it funny that" you then cry foul in a passive-aggressive manner when someone responds in a way you don't like.

Im not whining about it at all. The reason I post here is because I am a R and F fan. But, I think there are interestimg smart people here and when I hear some post calling kettles black, I have to say...really?

[hammersavage]

Actually, I figured out what your spin would be if Al Queda made it clear that they didn't want Obama in office. You would say that they are terrorists, so you can't take them at their word, so their statements mean that they really want Obama in office. Therefore you should vote McCain to show those terrorists!

I like when Mikey quotes Mikey.

[GreatAmericanZero]

the right likes to paint obama as a "piece of shit"...they always try to turn what he is into something people should fear (terrorist, muslim, socialist, anti-white (cuz of the rev.wright stuff), etc.) but I don't see people attack McCain like that. Most people say McCain is old and he is a Bush ass-kisser....but will also admit he served our country proudly. But there is a big leap between being a "Bush ass kisser" and a "terrorist" as far as what names each side is calling eachother, no?

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Im not whining about it at all. The reason I post here is because I am a R and F fan. But, I think there are interestimg smart people here and when I hear some post calling kettles black, I have to say...really?

If that's all ya did I'd have no problem with you. I'm all in favor of disagreeing. I just like it when people do it intelligently as opposed to dropping key words and labels. Obama sucks? Ok, explain. As opposed to "he's a towel head from Democratsville eating children" which is essentially the gist of most of your points. I'll give ya points for the post I'm quoting as being better than most as your explanation is an actual explanation.

And nothing can move Mojopin, he's like a mountain of reinforced opinion, dude.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

the right likes to paint obama as a "piece of shit"...they always try to turn what he is into something people should fear (terrorist, muslim, socialist, anti-white (cuz of the rev.wright stuff), etc.) but I don't see people attack McCain like that. Most people say McCain is old and he is a Bush ass-kisser....but will also admit he served our country proudly. But there is a big leap between being a "Bush ass kisser" and a "terrorist" as far as what names each side is calling eachother, no?

Bush-lover

see what I did there? reverse psychology

by the way republicans are economically liberal.

[hammersavage]

If that's all ya did I'd have no problem with you. I'm all in favor of disagreeing. I just like it when people do it intelligently as opposed to dropping key words and labels. Obama sucks? Ok, explain. As opposed to "he's a towel head from Democratsville eating children" which is essentially the gist of most of your points. I'll give ya points for the post I'm quoting as being better than most as your explanation is an actual explanation.

And nothing can move Mojopin, he's like a mountain of reinforced opinion, dude.

Fuckin' starvin'. We got any children from Democratsville back there?

[CofyCrakCocaine]

I like when Mikey quotes Mikey.

I cum a little each time he does that.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Fuckin' starvin'. We got any children from Democratsville back there?

(In Fez's tripping slow voices) Weeeree Ffreeeshhhh oouuuttt

[JerseySean]

If that's all ya did I'd have no problem with you. I'm all in favor of disagreeing. I just like it when people do it intelligently as opposed to dropping key words and labels. Obama sucks? Ok, explain. As opposed to "he's a towel head from Democratsville eating children" which is essentially the gist of most of your points. I'll give ya points for the post I'm quoting as being better than most as your explanation is an actual explanation.

And nothing can move Mojopin, he's like a mountain of reinforced opinion, dude.

What I am saying is that it rolls both ways on this board. Palin has been called a cunt repeatedly and I really didnt make a big deal about until people started getting angry over the Barry thing. It goes both ways and also, some points I make on here are ignored when noone has a good answer for them, they ignore it. IE-Obama sending mon report that came out today, etc.

[CofyCrakCocaine]

What I am saying is that it rolls both ways on this board. Palin has been called a cunt repeatedly and I really didnt make a big deal about until people started getting angry over the Barry thing. It goes both ways and also, some points I make on here are ignored when noone has a good answer for them, they ignore it. IE-Obama sending mon report that came out today, etc.

Yes it does. That's why you're getting some splash-back from the toilet water.

[JerseySean]

Yes it does. That's why you're getting some splash-back from the toilet water.

Fair enough.

[GreatAmericanZero]

What I am saying is that it rolls both ways on this board. Palin has been called a cunt repeatedly and I really didnt make a big deal about until people started getting angry over the Barry thing. It goes both ways and also, some points I make on here are ignored when noone has a good answer for them, they ignore it. IE-Obama sending mon report that came out today, etc.

maybe people ignore some of your points because they are boring. People can't wait to defend (or attack) a controversial action by a politician but i dont think most people have the stamina to go with every single little thing

[brettmojo]

some points I make on here are ignored when noone has a good answer for them,
Yeah... That's why.

[mikeyboy]

What I am saying is that it rolls both ways on this board. Palin has been called a cunt repeatedly and I really didnt make a big deal about until people started getting angry over the Barry thing. It goes both ways and also, some points I make on here are ignored when noone has a good answer for them, they ignore it. IE-Obama sending mon report that came out today, etc.

I may not have been paying enough attention, so I can't speak to whether or not your points were ignored this morning, but you're certainly guilty of it as well.

Also, you keep going back to the Barry thing. Was anybody really all that upset by it? Mojo has said many times that he wasn't bothere by it, but was merely asking about why you were doing it. You ignore that, however, and bring it up again and again.

It doesn't bother me either, but I do think that kind of labeling distracts from your legitimate points. Like the left wing guy who used to post here who insisted on calling Fox News "Faux News" or the
Howard Stern hater who insists on referring to him as "Hoo Hoo", it just makes it hard to take their arguments seriously.

[epo]

What I am saying is that it rolls both ways on this board. Palin has been called a cunt repeatedly and I really didnt make a big deal about until people started getting angry over the Barry thing. It goes both ways and also, some points I make on here are ignored when noone has a good answer for them, they ignore it. IE-Obama sending mon report that came out today, etc.

You keep raising this point about Palin and the "c" bomb.

I would be intrigued to see on this board the number of times those two words have been brought up together and how many times JerseySean has brought them up.

It's like a talking point that doesn't stop, yet I don't know if it's true!

[Friday]

if i never hear the phrase 'talking point' again it will be too soon.

i can't wait until election night!

[mikeyboy]

You keep raising this point about Palin and the "c" bomb.

I would be intrigued to see on this board the number of times those two words have been brought up together and how many times JerseySean has brought them up.

It's like a talking point that doesn't stop, yet I don't know if it's true!

I did some searching. I found the c-word used twice on this board towards Plain when not mentioned by JerseySean.

[epo]

I did some searching. I found the c-word used twice on this board towards Plain when not mentioned by JerseySean.

So "repeatedly" means two in reference to an entire message board.

Good to know.

[GreatAmericanZero]

i called Bristol Palin a "cum dumpster" once..does that count for anything?

[biozombie]

i called Bristol Palin a "cum dumpster" once..does that count for anything?

yeah, a little thing my people call "accuracy".

[KnoxHarrington]

I 'd like to state for the record that I have not called Sarah Palin a "cunt". The only time I used the term in relation to her was when I said in a thread "Jesus H. Christ, after all the babies she's had, I bet an elephant could crawl out of that cunt with no problem."

[epo]

I 'd like to state for the record that I have not called Sarah Palin a "cunt". The only time I used the term in relation to her was when I said in a thread "Jesus H. Christ, after all the babies she's had, I bet an elephant could crawl out of that cunt with no problem."

Well, MikeyBoy tells us twice. I know that JerseySean has used it at least twice. So logically then, JerseySean is as bad or worse than the ENTIRE board in calling Governor Sarah Palin a "C".

Scumbag!

[mikeyboy]

Well, MikeyBoy tells us twice. I know that JerseySean has used it at least twice. So logically then, JerseySean is as bad or worse than the ENTIRE board in calling Governor Sarah Palin a "C".

Scumbag!

Sooooooo, JerseySean hates women? I'm setting up the robocalls now.

[Tenbatsuzen]

You know, I watched Obama's informercial last night, and I liked it a lot.

THere was just one thing I HAAAAATED about it.

During the vignette with the guy who worked at the Ford plant, Obama is voicing how he has a tough time making ends meet...

....while he's taking his family of four out to eat.

I'm sorry, if your work load is cut back, you should be looking for ways to make that dollar stretch instead of going out for BBQ.

[brettmojo]

I 'd like to state for the record that I have not called Sarah Palin a "cunt".
I hope I have.

[TheMojoPin]

Who cares if people who hate Palin insult her? We know WHY they're doing it...they hate her!

I don't care if people call Obama "Barry"...I just keep looking for an answer as to why it's supposed to be insulting, but nobody can give one to me outside of some vague statement about it being an "alias." It makes no sense.

[mikeyboy]

Who cares if people who hate Palin insult her? We know WHY they're doing it...they hate her!

I don't care if people call Obama "Barry"...I just keep looking for an answer as to why it's supposed to be insulting, but nobody can give one to me outside of some vague statement about it being an "alias." It makes no sense.

Besides, didn't they establish that the really derogatory thing to do is to refer to Obama by his middle name. With that in mind, I nominate "Hoozy" as the new name JerseySean can use when talking about Obama.

[Recyclerz]

Who cares if people who hate Palin insult her? We know WHY they're doing it...they hate her!

I don't care if people call Obama "Barry"...I just keep looking for an answer as to why it's supposed to be insulting, but nobody can give one to me outside of some vague statement about it being an "alias." It makes no sense.

They do it because it's vaguely demeaning and diminutive (see "Democrat Party") and it gives them a chuckle to get under our sensitive, left-wing skins. David Brooks said a lot earlier in this election cycle was that one of the few things holding together the Republican coalition this time around was contempt for Democrats. Good luck with that this time guys.

[thejives]

I see what's been going on in this thread ... and i don't like it.

I say this a lot, but I can't stress it enough. Put JerseySean on ignore.
There's a lot of good discussion with reasonable conservatives and moderates (like scott and even SP!). But you'll just end up talking in circles with that guy though, and when he doesn't get the rise he wants he'll up the offensive level to suit. It's like posting with a mental patient.

I originally used the ignore button because he made a really offensive comment about AIDS a long time ago (which I can't seem to find now), and I've really appreciated the politics board much more ever since.

[hammersavage]

I think he said something like 'I hope Hoozy gets AIDS'

[thejives]

I think he said something like 'I hope Hoozy gets AIDS'

Heh... No it was something involving the people who have HIV deserve it.

It's so odd. I can't even find the post where I explained why I was done with responding to his madness. I'm even annoyed I spent time searching for it...

[JerseySean]

You know, I watched Obama's informercial last night, and I liked it a lot.

THere was just one thing I HAAAAATED about it.

During the vignette with the guy who worked at the Ford plant, Obama is voicing how he has a tough time making ends meet...

....while he's taking his family of four out to eat.

I'm sorry, if your work load is cut back, you should be looking for ways to make that dollar stretch instead of going out for BBQ.

I understand what you are saying, but part of being an American is that the "luxury" of taking the family out to an all you can eat BBQ buffet shouldnt be something Americans have to think about doing. Worrying about the ability to do that is a sign that there is no middle class. Hoozy had this one right. I thought the opposite.

[JerseySean]

Obama spokesman Bill Burton confirms Drudge's report that two right-leaning papers, the Washington Times and the New York Post, have lost their seats on the Obama plane, along with the Dallas Morning News.

"We're trying to reach as many swing voters that we can and unfortunately had to make some tough choices. but we are accommodating these folks in every way possible," he said.

The Post and the Morning News are both read primarily in states that aren't in play, but the Washington Times is read in Northern Virginia.

Burton said the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times had returned to the plane, and confirmed that Ebony and Jet magazines have seats on the plane.

He said the campaign was making space for the dropped outlets on the campaign bus where possible, and that they were encouraged to travel with Senator Joe Biden.

McCain barred liberal columnists Maureen Dowd and Joe Klein from his campaign plane, space has grown very tight on Obama's in recent days.

The Times took an ideologically-charged shot at Obama in response to its barring, a reminder of the political undercurrent to the choice.

Nice job.

[angrymissy]

Nice job.

McCain barred liberal columnists Maureen Dowd and Joe Klein from his campaign plane, space has grown very tight on Obama's in recent days.

If you have no space left on your plane, are you going to keep the people who support you or are against you?

[TheMojoPin]

Nice job.

Agreed.

[JerseySean]

McCain barred liberal columnists Maureen Dowd and Joe Klein from his campaign plane, space has grown very tight on Obama's in recent days.

If you have no space left on your plane, are you going to keep the people who support you or are against you?

There is a difference between columnists and reporters. If McCain banned the NYT, you would have a point. This sounds to me like Bush Administration politics as usual.

[angrymissy]

There is a difference between columnists and reporters. If McCain banned the NYT, you would have a point. This sounds to me like Bush Administration politics as usual.

Maureen Dowd is with The New York Times, so he did just that.
Maureen Dowd is a Washington D.C.-based columnist for The New York Times. She has worked for the Times since 1983, when she joined as a metropolitan reporter.

Again.

You have no space on your plane. People have to be booted.

Do you keep the people for you or against you? The answer seems pretty clear, especially this close to Election Day.

[TheMojoPin]

There is a difference between columnists and reporters. If McCain banned the NYT, you would have a point. This sounds to me like Bush Administration politics as usual.

It's the NYP and the Washington Times. They're shitty rags. Fuck 'em. The National Enquirer gets huge circulation, but it's still trash.

[JerseySean]

Maureen Dowd is with The New York Times, so he did just that.

Again.

You have no space on your plane. People have to be booted.

Do you keep the people for you or against you? The answer seems pretty clear, especially this close to Election Day.

New york Times reporters are still on McCain's plane. Dowd isnt.

[JerseySean]

It's the NYP and the Washington Times. They're shitty rags. Fuck 'em. The National Enquirer gets huge circulation, but it's still trash.

Yea, except it is more than that. it is supressing opposition's access. Sounds like a Bush move.

[EliSnow]

New york Times reporters are still on McCain's plane. Dowd isnt.

Are you sure about that?

You may be right, but I didn't see anything in that article saying that.

[JerseySean]

Are you sure about that?

You may be right, but I didn't see anything in that article saying that.

Yes...positive

[angrymissy]

Also - They were offered seats that are available on Biden's plane, since there are no more available on Obama's.

Yea, except it is more than that. it is supressing opposition's access. Sounds like a Bush move.

Sounds more like a Palin move...

Yes...positive

Link please.

[JerseySean]

Sounds more like a Palin move...



Link please.

Really?

[EliSnow]

Yes...positive

Let me be clearer about my point. Can you cite any support for this assertion other than to say that you're positive?

[EliSnow]

Really?

Since Palin refused to answer questions from the press until very recently, yes, it does.

[JerseySean]

Let me be clearer about my point. Can you cite any support for this assertion other than to say that you're positive?

David Kirkpatrick and Michael Cooper are still on the McCain plane. Im not searching for an article that doesnt exist. Dowd(Columnist) got booted, reporters are still on the plane.

[JerseySean]

Since Palin refused to answer questions from the press until very recently, yes, it does.

when was the last time Obama took questions from the press? She did Hour long interviews throughout September. Morover, its not pertinant to this discussion. Noone is saying Obama has to give interviews to these people, but he is now denying acces because of a few negative reports.

[TheMojoPin]

Yea, except it is more than that. it is supressing opposition's access.

It would be if there were no "Right" media outlets with access to Obama. Hell, these two fishwraps still have that, they just can't fit on the plane. There's a limited amount of space...why in God's name would any candidate give the boot to outlets less shitty than the NYP and Washington Times?

[TheMojoPin]

when was the last time Obama took questions from the press? She did Hour long interviews throughout September. Morover, its not pertinant to this discussion. Noone is saying Obama has to give interviews to these people, but he is now denying acces because of a few negative reports.

Nobody is being denied access. They're losing seats on a plane. The plane isn't the only access to Obama. Stop willfully lying.

[angrymissy]

Nobody is being denied access. They're losing seats on a plane. The plane isn't the only access to Obama. Stop willfully lying.

And were offered seats on the VP plane.

This is just the Drudge "fake outrage large font bold underlined link" article of the day

[EliSnow]

when was the last time Obama took questions from the press? She did Hour long interviews throughout September. Morover, its not pertinant to this discussion. Noone is saying Obama has to give interviews to these people, but he is now denying acces because of a few negative reports.

He's not denying access. He's denying a seat on his plane. It's not the same thing.

[JerseySean]

Nobody is being denied access. They're losing seats on a plane. The plane isn't the only access to Obama. Stop willfully lying.

there is a huge difference in being on the plane and not. A news outlet cant fly commercial and hope to keep the candidate's schedule. It is cutting them off from many events. And noone has had any access to Obama in over a month.

[angrymissy]

there is a huge difference in being on the plane and not. A news outlet cant fly commercial and hope to keep the candidate's schedule. It is cutting them off from many events. And noone has had any access to Obama in over a month.
Except they offered them seats on Biden's plane.

No one has had access to Obama in a month? What in the world are you talking about???

[JerseySean]

And were offered seats on the VP plane.

This is just the Drudge "fake outrage large font bold underlined link" article of the day

Two different planes, two different event schedules. They already have the VP plane. Why double down on reporters? Its cutting off access for those who critisize the "Chose One"

[JerseySean]

Except they offered them seats on Biden's plane.

Those outlets HAVE seats on Bidens plane.

[TheMojoPin]

Two different planes, two different event schedules. They already have the VP plane. Why double down on reporters? Its cutting off access for those who critisize the "Chose One"

Stay with me...if there's no room left on the plane, why would they choose to kick off representatives from bigger/better/less hostile media outlets?

JerseySean supports shitty journalism affirmative action. He wants to share the access like a media socialist.

[TheMojoPin]

And noone has had any access to Obama in over a month.

You can't be serious.

[angrymissy]

Two different planes, two different event schedules. They already have the VP plane. Why double down on reporters? Its cutting off access for those who critisize the "Chose One"

Again - if you don't have space on your plane, the only smart move is to cut the shit.

NYPost is not exactly a shining example of journalism. This is a ridiculous "outrage", considering McCain has booted people as well.

[EliSnow]

A news outlet cant fly commercial and hope to keep the candidate's schedule. It is cutting them off from many events.

Bullshit. These news outlets can.

[JerseySean]

Stay with me...if there's no room left on the plane, why would they choose to kick off representatives from bigger/better/less hostile media outlets?

JerseySean supports shitty journalism affirmative action. He wants to share the access like a media socialist.

Honestly, because its bad politics. No need to bring on critism from these outlets.

[JerseySean]

Bullshit. These news outlets can.

No they cant. good luck trying to keep pace with a Pres campaign with secret service blocking off every road to and fro a private airport and then trying to get flights from Columbus, OH to Albequerque, NM. good luck with that

[TheMojoPin]

No they cant. good luck trying to keep pace with a Pres campaign with secret service blocking off every road to and fro a private airport and then trying to get flights from Columbus, OH to Albequerque, NM. good luck with that

Good Lord, you've gone off onto half a dozen tangents of complete fantasy from this total non-issue.

[TheMojoPin]

Honestly, because its bad politics. No need to bring on critism from these outlets.

How is it bad politics? These outlets are trashing him left and right as it is. Why is he going to move less hostile media outlets off the plane?

[JerseySean]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

This is an interesting poll. the reason I present it, is because of the lack of bounce from the Obamercial. If McCain is within 4 on election day, he can pull a Bush 2000 Electoral College victory.

[EliSnow]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

This is an interesting poll. the reason I present it, is because of the lack of bounce from the Obamercial. If McCain is within 4 on election day, he can pull a Bush 2000 Electoral College victory.

Except that the state-by-state polls suggest that Obama's more likely to pull an Electoral College victory than McCain. It's why people have been saying that the nationwide polls mean less than the state-by-state polls.

[JerseySean]

Except that the state-by-state polls suggest that Obama's more likely to pull an Electoral College victory than McCain. It's why people have been saying that the nationwide polls mean less than the state-by-state polls.

No, there is a direct corolation from national poll movement to state-by-state polls. If McCain is within lets say 3, then that would suggest tighter state races. As the presumptive favorite from the start, Obama would be in trouble if we are that tight on election day.

[TheMojoPin]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

This is an interesting poll. the reason I present it, is because of the lack of bounce from the Obamercial. If McCain is within 4 on election day, he can pull a Bush 2000 Electoral College victory.

Nothing at this point is done by a campaign in Obama's position looking for a significant "bounce"...if a bounce occurs, it's cake, but seeking a bounce is too risky. All he needs to do, and what the commercial was largely designed to do, is hold and solidify his lead in the final week.

And besides, picking a single poll to try ad show/prove/argue anything is pretty silly.

Look at it, Sean. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK AT IT!!! (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/)

[IMSlacker]

Except that the state-by-state polls suggest that Obama's more likely to pull an Electoral College victory than McCain. It's why people have been saying that the nationwide polls mean less than the state-by-state polls.

You're forgetting that the state polls are all completely wrong. JerseySean is sure of it.

[TheMojoPin]

No, there is a direct corolation from national poll movement to state-by-state polls. If McCain is within lets say 3, then that would suggest tighter state races. As the presumptive favorite from the start, Obama would be in trouble if we are that tight on election day.

That's a ridiculous argument. McCain's national numbers are being inflated by bumps in states where he has like zero chance of numbers. The state-by-state polls show a much cleaerer picture because it allows one to evaluate the electoral vote results, which Obama is trouncing McCain in essentially every realistic scenario. McCain needs critical STATE polls to shift his way, not the national numbers.

[EliSnow]

No, there is a direct corolation from national poll movement to state-by-state polls. If McCain is within lets say 3, then that would suggest tighter state races. As the presumptive favorite from the start, Obama would be in trouble if we are that tight on election day.

No, there isn't. Look at the state polls -- they are showing that Obama is up a lot in some key swing states.

[angrymissy]

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

[TheMojoPin]

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

Destroyed by his own site. So cruel.

[JerseySean]

Nothing at this point is done by a campaign in Obama's position looking for a significant "bounce"...if a bounce occurs, it's cake, but seeking a bounce is too risky. All he needs to do, and what the commercial was largely designed to do, is hold and solidify his lead in the final week.

And besides, picking a single poll to try ad show/prove/argue anything is pretty silly.

Look at it, Sean. LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK AT IT!!! (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/)

Nope, I wont click it! Again, Im not citing the poll for the horserace number, just the lack of significant movement. I still think he needs to be reasonable aggressive over the weekend. Various polls show between 13 and 19% persuadables. Nevermind the asshole undecideds who will break even for each. the fact that this many people are still persuadable means what I have been saying all along.

-The race is close
-It will come down to one thing
-Some People are afraid that McCain is like Bush
-Some People have a fear of Obama

So these persuadables will ask themselves,

Is McCain really a third Bush term?

Can I trust this Obama guy?

Which ever happens, it will happen in mass one way or the other.

[EliSnow]

Which ever happens, it will happen in mass one way or the other.

Why will it?

You're acting as if all those remaining undecided will go one way or another and will shift the decision. Maybe, the undecideds will split along similar ratios as the polls showing those for Obama and McCain. 46% of the undecideds may go one way and the other 54 go the other. Isn't that more likely than all 100% of the undecideds go the same way?

[TheMojoPin]

The race is not close.

You refuse to read the best and widely respected breakdown of why it's not close.

[JerseySean]

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

I saw that. But here's the deal, a national enviornment shift trickles into states. Ill give you an example. During the GOP primary McCain/RomneyHuckabee were slogging it out in SC. Rudy was sitting in Florida running ads and meeting voters/etc. The national enviorment dictated the Florida outcome. Its a bigger piece than a state by state.

Let me make this clear.

McCain needs a NATIONAL shift to move state polls. State polls will lag a day or two.

[JerseySean]

Why will it?

You're acting as if all those remaining undecided will go one way or another and will shift the decision. Maybe, the undecideds will split along similar ratios as the polls showing those for Obama and McCain. 46% of the undecideds may go one way and the other 54 go the other. Isn't that more likely than all 100% of the undecideds go the same way?

undecideds will break about even. It is the persuadables, IE- Im voting for McCain or Obama but am not 100%. These people are the real volitiales.

[EliSnow]

undecideds will break about even. It is the persuadables, IE- Im voting for McCain or Obama but am not 100%. These people are the real volitiales.

My point still stands, even towards the "pesuadables." They are more likely to split than all of them going the same freaking way. Some may be persuaded by the fact that they are sick of Republicans holding the presidency. Some may think that Obama is untrustworthy. Some may think McCain is a maverick, but don't want someone like Palin a heartbeat away.

People have varying views and priorities. They are not all the same.

And when you really get to it, given Bush's lack of popularity and the economy being what it is, McCain is lucky to be as close as he is.

[TheMojoPin]

Sean...seriously...you're basically making up scenarios that are complete fantasy, unrealistic, incredibly vague and have about 0% chance of happening in the next 4 days.

[EliSnow]

I saw that. But here's the deal, a national enviornment shift trickles into states. Ill give you an example. During the GOP primary McCain/RomneyHuckabee were slogging it out in SC. Rudy was sitting in Florida running ads and meeting voters/etc. The national enviorment dictated the Florida outcome. Its a bigger piece than a state by state.

That's not a great example. There's no proof that the outcome in Florida was dictated by the national enviornment. Maybe people in Florida didn't like Rudy despite his attempt to court them.

[JerseySean]

The race is not close.

You refuse to read the best and widely respected breakdown of why it's not close.

Im saying the electorate isnt as crystalized as people are saying. There is certainly a volitility in this campaign which will remain over the weekend. I do read 538. I can tell you for sure that the early voting data he is citing from CO andNV today is wrong. I can tell you that for sure. Polling data on early voting is always wrong.

Thursday, October 23, 2008
Colorado Early Voting Shows a Close Race
Despite the polls showing Senator Barack Obama with a significant lead over John McCain in Colorado, 9News reports that the early numbers for the first two days of voting show the race may be close.
According to early voting statistics posted by Colorado’s Secretary of State on Tuesday, 96,104 mail-in ballots were returned by Democrats. Republicans turned in 99,306. When looking at the number of voters who showed up at early voting centers, 9,173 were Democrats and 6,309 were Republicans.

McCain will win the early and absentee votes in CO and NV.

NOVEMBER 02, 2004
Colorado | Record Early Voting In Colorado
Also from Denver’s Channel 7:

A spokeswoman for the Colorado secretary of state’s office said that nearly 850,000 people voted early or by absentee. That compares to more than 775,000 people who voted early in 2000.
Lisa Duran predicts voter turnout will be between 70 percent to 75 percent this year.

There were also articles in 2004 that showed significant leads for Kerry. Bush knew he won it with absentees and thats why they canccelled swings there late in October 04.

[TheMojoPin]

This isn't 2004.

You can't tell us any of these things your're claiming "for sure."

[angrymissy]

I can tell you for sure that the early voting data he is citing from CO andNV today is wrong. I can tell you that for sure. Polling data on early voting is always wrong.

There were also articles in 2004 that showed significant leads for Kerry. Bush knew he won it with absentees and thats why they canccelled swings there late in October 04.

Unless you are counting the votes yourself, you cannot tell anyone for sure that anything is wrong.

Here are the polls from 04 leading up to Election Day. They showed Kerry with no significant lead, most were tied or showed Bush with a slight lead.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.html

[TheMojoPin]

Anthony's nightmare:

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh153/OleMissCub17/osign.jpg[/quote]

http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/6833/martinsvilleov5.jpg[/quote]

http://rednecks4obama.com/data/storage/attachments/4dcedf4bf43113a9f7db98b505929f44.jpg

[TheMojoPin]

Unless you are counting the votes yourself, you cannot tell anyone for sure that anything is wrong.

Here are the polls from 04 leading up to Election Day. They showed Kerry with no significant lead, most were tied or showed Bush with a slight lead.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.html

Using 538's tracking systems, Bush was hovering around a 50% chance of winning the last few weeks before the election. His winning was nowhere near the upset Sean wants it to be since during that time Kerry never cracked above around 40% (I believe 43% was the highest chance he had with 2 weeks to go) and never held a statistical lead over Bush...he only managed to "get close" and Democrats were, ironically, doing what Sean is doing and hoped that that would be enough.

McCain, by stark contrast, has less than a 4% chance of winning.

This is NOT 2004.

[Furtherman]

volitiales.

volitility

Stop using and misspelling this word.

[JerseySean]

Unless you are counting the votes yourself, you cannot tell anyone for sure that anything is wrong.

Here are the polls from 04 leading up to Election Day. They showed Kerry with no significant lead, most were tied or showed Bush with a slight lead.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.html
People are counting votes for sure. Unless Republicans in Co and NV are moving to Obama in significant numbers, which theyre not. I can tell you FOR SURE that McCain has won early voting and absentee. While Obama has moved leaps and bounds from Kerry 2004, so has the RNC as far as turnout goes. We are better than Dems as far as thiss goes. Much better. I am not saying that McCain will win Co on election day, I think he wont. But FOR SURE, he has won early voting.

[TheMojoPin]

People are counting votes for sure. Unless Republicans in Co and NV are moving to Obama in significant numbers, which theyre not. I can tell you FOR SURE that McCain has won early voting and absentee. While Obama has moved leaps and bounds from Kerry 2004, so has the RNC as far as turnout goes. We are better than Dems as far as thiss goes. Much better. I am not saying that McCain will win Co on election day, I think he wont. But FOR SURE, he has won early voting.

No, he hasn't. Stop it.

[JerseySean]

This is NOT 2004.

Agreed. the volatility in the electorate is much higher than it was in 2004.

[JerseySean]

No, he hasn't. Stop it.

What are you betting?

[TheMojoPin]

The reality of CO. (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/mccains-mountain-of-problem.html)

In the wee hours of this morning, Public Policy Polling released data from Colorado and New Mexico. The toplines are strong for Obama, giving him leads of 10 and 17 points, respectively in those states. What's worse for McCain, however, is that PPP estimates that nearly two-thirds of Coloradans have already cast their ballots, as have 55-60 percent of New Mexicans, with large majorities of those votes going to Barack Obama. This is backed up to some extent by Michael McDonald's turnout statistics. In Colorado, the state had already processed approximately 1.3 million ballots as of Thursday, around 60 percent of the total 2004 turnout. In Bernalillo County (Albuquerque), New Mexico (statewide figures are not available), 145,000 ballots had been cast as of Wednesday, equaling 55 percent of 2004's total.

"Like, FER SHER, bra!"

[TheMojoPin]

Agreed. the volatility in the electorate is much higher than it was in 2004.

You can say it all you want, but that doesn't make it so.

[TheMojoPin]

What are you betting?

If Obama becomes president, I ban you for life. If McCain wins, I'll ban myself.

[JerseySean]

The reality of CO. (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/mccains-mountain-of-problem.html)



"Like, FER SHER, bra!"

Please see above posts with stats. Actual stats.

[JerseySean]

If Obama bcomes president, I ban you for life. If McCain wins, I'll ban myself.

Im betting on CO early voting. Not on the outcome

[TheMojoPin]

Please see above posts with stats. Actual stats.

As opposed to the fake statistics in the link I provided? Guh?

I also like how your quote from 8 days ago somehow trumps analysis from TODAY.

[TheMojoPin]

Im betting on CO early voting. Not on the outcome

Borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring.

[mikeyboy]

This is backed up to some extent by Michael McDonald's turnout statistics.

He really is versatile.

http://www.soultracks.com/files/images/artists/MichaelMcdonald2.jpg

[Furtherman]

Agreed. the volatility in the electorate is much higher than it was in 2004.

That's three!

I wonder which right-hack gave him the idea that this word describes this election.

[TheMojoPin]

He really is versatile.

http://www.soultracks.com/files/images/artists/MichaelMcdonald2.jpg

This is gonna be one smooooooooooooooooooooooooooth election.

[TheMojoPin]

Crushing Sean's "fer sher" declarations:

Early voting stats as of October 30th. (http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html)

Nevada: Clark and Washoe Counties hold 80% or so of Nevada's voters. They went Kerry by 6 and Bush by 4 in 2004. In 2008, early voting has already accounted for 57.9% of the *state's* total votes from 2004. Votes by registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by 22% in clark and 14% in Nevada. Unless Democrats are voting in percentages for Obama much lower than expected by polling of the state, Obama's already banked an insurmountable lead in the state.

More details into how Colorado is going big for Obama. (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/10/colorado-results.html)

[JerseySean]

Crushing Sean's "fer sher" declarations:

Early voting stats as of October 30th. (http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html)

Nevada: Clark and Washoe Counties hold 80% or so of Nevada's voters. They went Kerry by 6 and Bush by 4 in 2004. In 2008, early voting has already accounted for 57.9% of the *state's* total votes from 2004. Votes by registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by 22% in clark and 14% in Nevada. Unless Democrats are voting in percentages for Obama much lower than expected by polling of the state, Obama's already banked an insurmountable lead in the state.

More details into how Colorado is going big for Obama. (http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2008/10/colorado-results.html)

Here is what that number misses and it goes back to the difference in turnout programs and the Dems have fucked the dog again. When you target early/absentee votes, you need to target light voting independants who will break your way in your matrix. Thats what the Republicans do. Democrats fucked the dog. A newly registered voter will vote at a 75%-90% clip. They are reliable in a new year.

Strong Dems and Strong Republicans VOTE ANYWAY!!!!!!!!!! When a campaign targets them for early/absentee, they are wasting their time and money. People who are going to vote on election day means nothing as far as an AB operation goes.

[epo]

If Obama becomes president, I ban you for life. If McCain wins, I'll ban myself.

Loser leaves town match?

[TheMojoPin]

Here is what that number misses and it goes back to the difference in turnout programs and the Dems have fucked the dog again. When you target early/absentee votes, you need to target light voting independants who will break your way in your matrix. Thats what the Republicans do. Democrats fucked the dog. A newly registered voter will vote at a 75%-90% clip. They are reliable in a new year.

Strong Dems and Strong Republicans VOTE ANYWAY!!!!!!!!!! When a campaign targets them for early/absentee, they are wasting their time and money. People who are going to vote on election day means nothing as far as an AB operation goes.

"Fucked the dog?"

None of what you said explains how you "know" the GOP somehow has scores of voters in multiple critical states that McCain NEEDS to win to have a chance that are going to appear out of nowhere and overwhelmingly vote Republican.

[EliSnow]

"Fucked the dog?"

It's the original way to say screwed the pooch. I just read that the military says Fucked the Dog, and Tom Wolfe paraphrased it in The Right Stuff.

None of what you said explains how you "know" the GOP somehow has scores of voters in multiple critical states that McCain NEEDS to win to have a chance that are going to appear out of nowhere and overwhelmingly vote Republican.

SSWL

[Bourius]

I'm in a state that counts. FL. I'm not voting for the black guy.

[TheMojoPin]

His argument basically amounts to, "I don't like the numbers, so I'm going to ignore them until I find one bit of information I can stretch or spin in the face of overwheling evidence to the contrary. Then, when that is shown to be ridiulous, I'm going to make bold declarations about gigantic voting blocs that have somehow ecompletely escaped any major state or national poll as swooping in to save the day and elect John McCain!"

[TheMojoPin]

I'm in a state that counts. FL. I'm not voting for the black guy.

So vote for his white half.

[JerseySean]

"Fucked the dog?"

None of what you said explains how you "know" the GOP somehow has scores of voters in multiple critical states that McCain NEEDS to win to have a chance that are going to appear out of nowhere and overwhelmingly vote Republican.
florida early voting:

Party
Dem
45.6% Obama's flawed early turnout plan
Rep
38.2%
No/Oth
16.2% 70% of these people are Republican leaning voters.
Ballot
Absentee
41.5%
In-person
58.5%

Go look at 2004 early voting polls and actual stats. I am telling you for a fact that NV and CO early are going for McCain.

[Furtherman]

I'm in a state that counts. FL. I'm not voting for the black guy.

So vote for his white half.

I bet he's scratching his head right now.

Wuuuuuuuh?

[AKA]

That's three!

I wonder which right-hack gave him the idea that this word describes this election.

Good Catch!

Dick Morris on Newsmax.com (August 22) - "Poll Shows Volatility of Presidential Race" (http://www.newsmax.com/morris/barack_obama_john_mccain/2008/08/22/124064.html)

FOX Business (October 12) - "Volatility and volume typically have a tight relationship..." (http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/prediction-market-lets-forecast-recession-election/)

FOX Busienss (October 29) - "Make no mistake about it, volatility is here to stay..." (http://glickreport.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/10/29/this-rally-is-real/)

Ron Nehring (October 30) - "Republicans offer real job creation in a difficult economy
...Issue volatility has also been dramatic..." (http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v%7Cjq2q43wvsl855o%7Cxij1dpky 521ulp&xid=xiiq8j60pzdw5n&done=search.php%3Fsearchparams%3Da%253A5%253A%257B s%253A9%253A%2522issuedate%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A6% 253A%2522author%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A5%253A%2522ti tle%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A4%253A%2522body%2522%253B N%253Bs%253A12%253A%2522article_type%2522%253Bs%25 3A17%253A%25221192656582969_969%2522%253B%257D)

[mikeyboy]

I am telling you for a fact that NV and CO early are going for McCain.

How?

[Dougie Brootal]

If Obama becomes president, I ban you for life. If McCain wins, I'll ban myself.

hahahahaa!!!

[Furtherman]

That's three!

I wonder which right-hack gave him the idea that this word describes this election.

Good Catch!

Dick Morris on Newsmax.com (August 22) - "Poll Shows Volatility of Presidential Race" (http://www.newsmax.com/morris/barack_obama_john_mccain/2008/08/22/124064.html)

FOX Business (October 12) - "Volatility and volume typically have a tight relationship..." (http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/prediction-market-lets-forecast-recession-election/)

FOX Busienss (October 29) - "Make no mistake about it, volatility is here to stay..." (http://glickreport.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/10/29/this-rally-is-real/)

Ron Nehring (October 30) - "Republicans offer real job creation in a difficult economy
...Issue volatility has also been dramatic..." (http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v%7Cjq2q43wvsl855o%7Cxij1dpky 521ulp&xid=xiiq8j60pzdw5n&done=search.php%3Fsearchparams%3Da%253A5%253A%257B s%253A9%253A%2522issuedate%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A6% 253A%2522author%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A5%253A%2522ti tle%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A4%253A%2522body%2522%253B N%253Bs%253A12%253A%2522article_type%2522%253Bs%25 3A17%253A%25221192656582969_969%2522%253B%257D)


And an EXCELLENT return from you sir! I tip my hat to you AKA.

Now, I think this shows where JeresySean is gettings his "facts", which are just skewed opinions mixed with ignorant thought and that adds up to nothing.

[JerseySean]

Good Catch!

Dick Morris on Newsmax.com (August 22) - "Poll Shows Volatility of Presidential Race" (http://www.newsmax.com/morris/barack_obama_john_mccain/2008/08/22/124064.html)

FOX Business (October 12) - "Volatility and volume typically have a tight relationship..." (http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/markets/prediction-market-lets-forecast-recession-election/)

FOX Busienss (October 29) - "Make no mistake about it, volatility is here to stay..." (http://glickreport.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2008/10/29/this-rally-is-real/)

Ron Nehring (October 30) - "Republicans offer real job creation in a difficult economy
...Issue volatility has also been dramatic..." (http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?_adctlid=v%7Cjq2q43wvsl855o%7Cxij1dpky 521ulp&xid=xiiq8j60pzdw5n&done=search.php%3Fsearchparams%3Da%253A5%253A%257B s%253A9%253A%2522issuedate%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A6% 253A%2522author%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A5%253A%2522ti tle%2522%253BN%253Bs%253A4%253A%2522body%2522%253B N%253Bs%253A12%253A%2522article_type%2522%253Bs%25 3A17%253A%25221192656582969_969%2522%253B%257D)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=ag9Rr8t6lfvE&refer=home

I have honestly never read those articles, but here is Bloomberg talking about the same thing.

[TheMojoPin]

Go look at 2004 early voting polls and actual stats.

...

2004 is not a model for this election. Not even close. Both candidates in 2004 were in completely different positions than Obama and McCain in 2008. Kerry and Bush were only relatively close down the stretch, though Bush never actually gave up his lead and surged at the end. McCain and Obama aren't close at all. Obama is destroying McCain in too many states McCain needs to even have a chance. McCain would need an unprecedented surge of record proportions in multiple states to somehow win.

If you look at the comprehensive "actual stats" from this election as everyone keeps posting but you refuse to acknowledge or counter with cherrypicked or out of date stats you'd realize this is all but locked up. McCain has almost no chance to win, hence why your arguments revolve around vague and unprovable fantasy.

[celery]

If Obama becomes president, I ban you for life. If McCain wins, I'll ban myself.

JS, PLEASE agree to this.

[IMSlacker]

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

This is an interesting poll. the reason I present it, is because of the lack of bounce from the Obamercial. If McCain is within 4 on election day, he can pull a Bush 2000 Electoral College victory.

I guess this poll isn't very interesting.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/0tdooryrye6gmsnv1xgk5g.gif

[celery]

I guess this poll isn't very interesting.

http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/0tdooryrye6gmsnv1xgk5g.gif

Or any of these

http://i35.tinypic.com/2vn2qmr.jpg

[AKA]

Or any of these



Or any of these!

The Onion (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/poll_bullshit_is_most_important)

7-election (http://www.7-election.com/)

Nick's Kids Pick The President (http://www.nick.com/kpp/)(which hasn't been wrong in 20 years)

[mikeyboy]

Or any of these!

Nick's Kids Pick The President (http://www.nick.com/kpp/)(which hasn't been wrong in 20 years)

They picked Gore in 2000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_Pick_the_President)

[CofyCrakCocaine]

Stop using and misspelling this word.

veggietales?

[Jujubees2]

They picked Gore in 2000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_Pick_the_President)

Gore did win the popular vote in 2000.

[epo]

JS, PLEASE agree to this.

If Jersey Sean agrees...I'll put myself on the line as well with Mojo. He could have a two for 1.

[AKA]

Gore did win the popular vote in 2000.

Yeah!

[AKA]

If Jersey Sean agrees...I'll put myself on the line as well with Mojo. He could have a two for 1.

oooooh! I love a bandwagon!

Add me to it. 3 for 1 - but only if he agrees.

[hammersavage]

This is the internet version of 'I'll move to Canada if ****** gets elected'

[epo]

This is the internet version of 'I'll move to Canada if ****** gets elected'

Or the internet version of Ronnie B betting on the Olympics. I'll take Bolt.

[IMSlacker]

I hope he doesn't take the bet. So far, we've only seen denial. I want to see anger and acceptance.

[celery]

I'm not leaving the board, but I'll dance down the street as Goldust.

[Brad_Rush]

If Jersey Sean agrees...I'll put myself on the line as well with Mojo. He could have a two for 1.

Make it 3 for 1... this sounds fun!

[celery]

I can't see how JS won't accept this bet. He KNOWS the polls are wrong.

[brettmojo]

I'm in a state that counts. FL. I'm not voting for the black guy.
You're in a state that judging from 2000 doesn't count all that well.

[scottinnj]

You're in a state that judging from 2000 doesn't count all that well.

ZING!:clap:

[PhilDeez]

Look I am not going to try and convince you that ALL the polls are wrong, I think this thing is pretty much a done deal and am prepping myself for the Obama + 2/3 majority congress that follows for at least the next two years.
That said, I do find it interesting how Obama's tax threshold is continuing to drop from 250k-120k in the last week. Yes, his surrogates mentioned the lowest numbers, not him. There is also an article, on the hated Fox News, that discusses his plans to lower expectations promised during the campaign on Wednesday citing the economy - makes sense to me. But how is all of this not slightly bait and switch? This is not unique to Obama, but isn't he supposed to be a breath of change.
I am just curious how moderates who are pro-Obama right now might feel if the above holds true and his reign is more liberal than first presented.

[brettmojo]

Look I am not going to try and convince you that ALL the polls are wrong, I think this thing is pretty much a done deal and am prepping myself for the Obama + 2/3 majority congress that follows for at least the next two years.
That said, I do find it interesting how Obama's tax threshold is continuing to drop from 250k-120k in the last week. Yes, his surrogates mentioned the lowest numbers, not him. There is also an article, on the hated Fox News, that discusses his plans to lower expectations promised during the campaign on Wednesday citing the economy - makes sense to me. But how is all of this not slightly bait and switch? This is not unique to Obama, but isn't he supposed to be a breath of change.
I am just curious how moderates who are pro-Obama right now might feel if the above holds true and his reign is more liberal than first presented.
I myself, and I believe most people, don't really believe he can deliver on ALL of the things he's campaigned about. In reality no one could ever do that. That's just not how the fucked up government this country runs on works. I haven't really seen anything except him saying 200k now instead of 250k would have their taxes cut but that's because if you look at his plan most people between 250-200k wouldn't have their taxes change all that much. That being said I think, if what you say is the case, than he's just trying to bring the unbelievable expectations some folks have for a magic wand-like change to be a little more grounded in reality. I'm sure the problems with the economic situation over the past month or two might have affected his plans as well. But either way the basis on what he's running on haven't changed at all. It's not like his is the McCain campaign which has switched directions every week.

Any campaign will run on what the candidates WANT to do. However it usually if not always ends up being about what the candidate CAN do once elected. Opie is right when he says a lot of people will be disappointed that he doesn't fix everything within 100 days... But I can live with that more than I can live with another 4-8 years of government mismanagement and incompetence.

Look I am not going to try and convince you that ALL the polls are wrong,

Which is why I'm not gonna' call you JerseyPhil.

[thejives]

I think Obama's done a couple of smart things to set the tone for the early stages of his presidency.

First, he's lowered the expectations on the much-vaunted first 100 days (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5058285.ece). The Democrats tried that after the 2006 Election and it didn't build a longterm legislative agenda. Instead it achieved some short term goals and spent too much political capital early.

Second, he's planning for a lightning fast transition (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/10/30/2008-10-30_barack_obama_to_have_white_house_team_re.html). This is important because the players need to be on the field, in position and know what the plan is immediately after inauguration day.

And third, unlike John "we can do all three (http://www.examiner.com/x-1082-Philadelphia-News-Examiner~y2008m10d7-Live-Coverage-of-the-Second-ObamaMcCain-Debate)" McCain, Obama has been willing to set priorities in debates and interviews. He puts the middle class rescue package and the energy plan (http://http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/31/obama.blitzer/?iref=mpstoryview) at the top of his agenda.

The end result of this is that the new administration will be focused on getting results, not meeting early deadlines. They will be in place and ready to act. And they will have clear priorities from the top.

So, I think this bodes very well for the new administrations chances of implementing positive changes very quickly and yielding tangible results that aren't "leftist" or "centrist," but that actually help people.

[albo60s]

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081101041202.azy6f08j&show_article=1

Global media tycoon Rupert Murdoch has warned that a win by Democratic hopeful Barack Obama in next week's US election could worsen the world financial crisis, a report said Saturday.
In an interview with The Weekend Australian, owned by Murdoch's News Corporation, the newsman said if the Democrats implemented protectionist policies it would be "a real setback for globalisation".

[NewYorkDragons80]

Why are epo and mojo throwing their lives away so carelessly? :innocent:

[IMSlacker]

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081101041202.azy6f08j&show_article=1

Global media tycoon Rupert Murdoch has warned that a win by Democratic hopeful Barack Obama in next week's US election could worsen the world financial crisis, a report said Saturday.
In an interview with The Weekend Australian, owned by Murdoch's News Corporation, the newsman said if the Democrats implemented protectionist policies it would be "a real setback for globalisation".

shocking.

[Kevin]

McCain 1 Tycoon on his side... Obama 5million.. McCain is really closing the gap

[albo60s]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5051118.ece

Barack Obama’s senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week’s election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harbouring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.

The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of “hope” and “change” are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.

One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, “so there’s not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair”.


How America's presidents rated
The Times has ranked all 42 US presidents - was Bush Jr. bottom? Did JFK beat Abraham Lincoln?

Related Links
Obama aunt found in rundown estate
Obama must still fear failure... we did in 1997
Swinging polls raise Democrat lead doubts
Multimedia
Pictures: Obama's aunt found
The aide said that Mr Obama himself was the first to realise that expectations risked being inflated.

In an interview with a Colorado radio station, Mr Obama appeared to be engaged already in expectation lowering. Asked about his goals for the first hundred days, he said he would need more time to tackle such big and costly issues as health care reform, global warming and Iraq. “The first hundred days is going to be important, but it’s probably going to be the first thousand days that makes the difference,” he said. He has also been reminding crowds in recent days how “hard” it will be to achieve his goals, and that it will take time.

“I won’t stand here and pretend that any of this will be easy – especially now,” Mr Obama told a rally in Sarasota, Florida, yesterday, citing “the cost of this economic crisis, and the cost of the war in Iraq”. Mr Obama’s transition team is headed by John Podesta, a Washington veteran and a former chief-of-staff to Bill Clinton. He has spent months overseeing a virtual Democratic government-in-exile to plan a smooth transition should Mr Obama emerge victorious next week. The plans are so far advanced that an Obama Cabinet has been largely decided upon, with the expectation that most of his senior appointments could be announced shortly after election day.

Yet Mr Obama and his aides are under no illusions about the size of the challenges the Democrat will inherit if he enters the Oval Office. Tom Daschle, the party’s former leader in the US Senate and a strong contender for the post of White House chief-of-staff in an Obama administration, said last month that the winner next week would have only a 50 per cent chance of winning a second term in 2012.

Not only will the next president take office with the country sliding into a potentially long recession — and mired in debt — but the challenges abroad are immense. There is an unfinished war in Iraq, a worsening situation in Afghanistan and an unstable and nuclear-armed Pakistan to contend with. Iran appears intent on acquiring the bomb and there remains the ever-present threat from al-Qaeda and Islamic extremists.

If he wins, Mr Obama will inherit a Democratic-controlled Congress, and might even have the benefit of a 60-seat filibuster-proof “supermajority” in the Senate. Such a scenario would allow him to push through legislation largely unfettered by Republican opposition. Yet it also means that should the country still be mired in recession in three years’ time, voters — who have short memories — will probably blame him and the Democrats on Capitol Hill. Those stakes have led Mr Obama to conclude that while expectations need to be tempered, big things need to be achieved very early in his first term, when he will still have the political capital to achieve some of his most ambitious legislative goals.

Having promised “real” change, the pressure will be on him to deliver. In the Colorado interview, Mr Obama added: “The next president has got to come quickly out of the box.”

The early priorities being lined up if he takes power are a mixture of symbolism and substance. He plans to make a major address in a big Muslim country early in his first term. Having pledged on the campaign trail to close Guantanamo Bay, he is also determined to make early moves to rid America of the controversial prison. Yet what to do with the remaining inmates looms as an intractable problem, as many of their home governments refuse to allow them to return.

Mr Obama’s first legislative goals will be to follow through on his pledge to cut taxes for the middle class and raise them for the wealthiest Americans, and to push through a hugely expensive Bill to provide near-universal health insurance

[DiabloSammich]

Can I get a Stedman Summary on that?

[epo]

Can I get a Stedman Summary on that?

We need to teach the kid to summarize, quote and link don't we?

[epo]

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=081101041202.azy6f08j&show_article=1

Global media tycoon Rupert Murdoch has warned that a win by Democratic hopeful Barack Obama in next week's US election could worsen the world financial crisis, a report said Saturday.
In an interview with The Weekend Australian, owned by Murdoch's News Corporation, the newsman said if the Democrats implemented protectionist policies it would be "a real setback for globalisation".

HOLY SHIT! Rupert Murdoch said a democratic candidate was bad?

STOP THE PRESSES!

[thejives]

Can I get a Stedman Summary on that?

Short version: "I just learned how to cut and paste things."

[mikeyboy]

Short version: "I just learned how to cut and paste things."

Miss the FMJeff "don't post complete stories" rule.

[DonInNC]

"a real setback for globalisation".

Does this mean Obama is an isolationist?

[thejives]

Does this mean Obama is an isolationist?

No. It means Rupert Murdoch doesn't like him.

[DonInNC]

No. It means Rupert Murdoch doesn't like him.

Really, you'd never know that by watching Fox News. This is all too confusing, I guess I should keep letting Hollywood tell me how to vote.

[albo60s]

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D945TEE01&show_article=1

WASHINGTON (AP) - Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned.
Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, was instructed to leave the United States by a U.S. immigration judge who denied her asylum request, a person familiar with the matter told the AP late Friday. This person spoke on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to discuss Onyango's case

[DonInNC]

WASHINGTON (AP) - This person spoke on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to discuss Onyango's case

nice.

[SatCam]

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D945TEE01&show_article=1

WASHINGTON (AP) - Barack Obama's aunt, a Kenyan woman who has been quietly living in public housing in Boston, is in the United States illegally after an immigration judge rejected her request for asylum four years ago, The Associated Press has learned.
Zeituni Onyango, 56, referred to as "Aunti Zeituni" in Obama's memoir, was instructed to leave the United States by a U.S. immigration judge who denied her asylum request, a person familiar with the matter told the AP late Friday. This person spoke on condition of anonymity because no one was authorized to discuss Onyango's case

And this reflects badly on Obama....... how?

[PhilDeez]

Which is why I'm not gonna' call you JerseyPhil.

Thanks, I do feel I'm at least reasonable.

[thejives]

Really, you'd never know that by watching Fox News. This is all too confusing, I guess I should keep letting Hollywood tell me how to vote.

Someone accuses FOX of being in the tank for Obama.

This election really is about change.

[epo]

And this reflects badly on Obama....... how?

He's brown. Apparently our nation is supposed to care.

[thejives]

He's brown. Apparently our nation is supposed to care.

I love how when this story came out, righties were up in arms that Obama wasn't lifting his poor aunt out of poverty. Now they'll be livid that he didn't have her deported.

So very desperate.

[IMSlacker]

Really, you'd never know that by watching Fox News. This is all too confusing, I guess I should keep letting Hollywood tell me how to vote.

Like Victoria Jackson!

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

[TheMojoPin]

I haven't really seen anything except him saying 200k now instead of 250k would have their taxes cut but that's because if you look at his plan most people between 250-200k wouldn't have their taxes change all that much.

Exactly. This is being spun way out of control. All along the plan has been spelled out as having minimal or no tax cuts for the people between $200k and $250k. What he's pledged for everyone under $250k are no tax increases, and that hasn't changed.

[TheMojoPin]

538.com has spelled out how to spot Obama's path to victory on Tuesday:

We can probably assume, however, that IF the national polls tighten significantly (and to reiterate, the likelihood is that they will NOT), McCain will edge out a victory in North Carolina, Florida, Indiana, North Dakota, Montana, Georgia, and Missouri; put those states in the McCain column for the time being. Likewise, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa all appear safe for Obama, even in the case of significant tightening. Put those in the Obama column.

That leaves our five states in play. The victory conditions for Obama involving these five states proceed something as follows:

1. Win Pennsylvania and ANY ONE of Colorado, Virginia, Ohio, or Nevada*
2. Win Ohio and EITHER Colorado OR Virginia.
3. Win Colorado AND Virginia AND Nevada.

(* Nevada produces a 269-269 tie, which would probably be resolved for Obama in the House of Represenatives.)

Now, suppose you think that Colorado is already in the bag for Obama because of his large edge in early voting there. We can then simplify the victory conditions as follows:

1. Win Pennsylvania
2. Win Ohio
3. Win Virginia AND Nevada

That's basically what it comes down to, although I'm sure each campaign would claim that there are a larger number of states in play.

[IMSlacker]

539.com has spelled out how to spot Obama's path to victory on Tuesday:

They've added an elector? OMG! OMG! OMG! Now I have to re-do all of my spreadsheets!

[TheMojoPin]

Hahahaahaahaaah!

Melllllllltdownnnnnnnnn.

[thejives]

I wish Democrats could get a 1992 or 1996 map without a third party siphoning votes. Still, this one looks like it's shaping up incredibly.

[JerseySean]

Exactly. This is being spun way out of control. All along the plan has been spelled out as having minimal or no tax cuts for the people between $200k and $250k. What he's pledged for everyone under $250k are no tax increases, and that hasn't changed.

Rolling back tax cuts=tax increase FOR EVERYONE!

[JerseySean]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

Nice! good Cover up Sf chronicle.

[epo]

Rolling back tax cuts=tax increase FOR EVERYONE!

Worst
spin
ever

[epo]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

Nice! good Cover up Sf chronicle.

OH NO! A president who will fine polluters! COVER THIS UP!

[JerseySean]

Worst
spin
ever

Really? If you raise tax rates for everyone, that isnt a tax increasE?

[JerseySean]

OH NO! A president who will fine polluters! COVER THIS UP!

And bankrupt the coal industry.....smart

[epo]

And bankrupt the coal industry.....smart

Enforcing current law is bad?

Oh yea...we've had a president for the last 8 years who clearly doesn't give a shit about environmental protections. Saying that coal will go bankrupt is simply a hyperbolic point.

[TheMojoPin]

Really? If you raise tax rates for everyone, that isnt a tax increasE?

Spinster, spin me away.

It's going to back to a previous level of taxation. He's not raising taxes for everyone to new levels.

[JerseySean]

Spinster, spin me away.

It's going to back to a previous level of taxation. He's not raising taxes for everyone to new levels.

Thats not spin? Are you kidding?

The tax rate is what it is. If you increase that, whether you call it a rollback or whatever....is an.....

in·crease (n-krs)
v. in·creased, in·creas·ing, in·creas·es
v.intr.
1. To become greater or larger.
2. To multiply; reproduce.
v.tr.
To make greater or larger.
n. (nkrs)
1. The act of increasing: a steady increase in temperature.
2. The amount or rate by which something is increased: a tax increase of 15 percent.
3. Obsolete Reproduction and spread; propagation.

[Jujubees2]

Rolling back tax cuts=tax increase FOR EVERYONE!

SJ, how long have the Bush tax cuts been in effect and where has that gotten us? In the largest deficit ever. Maybe it's time for something different.

[TheMojoPin]

Thats not spin? Are you kidding?

The tax rate is what it is. If you increase that, whether you call it a rollback or whatever....is an.....

in·crease (n-krs)
v. in·creased, in·creas·ing, in·creas·es
v.intr.
1. To become greater or larger.
2. To multiply; reproduce.
v.tr.
To make greater or larger.
n. (nkrs)
1. The act of increasing: a steady increase in temperature.
2. The amount or rate by which something is increased: a tax increase of 15 percent.
3. Obsolete Reproduction and spread; propagation.

Yes, but it's also realistic. This country is just getting bigger and bigger and more expensive, yet somehow the myth of being able to have everyone continually pay less and less taxes is somehow gospel. It's simply not feasable if anyone expects this country to be able to want to pay for anything and still have a leg to stand on. It's not like he's raising them across the bard to levels we've never seen...it's going back to levels we've dealt with before for people under a certain income level. That's how it has to be. Bush's stupid tax cuts were a ridiculous idea that caused FAR more damage than anyone they "helped." You're spinning this to make it sound like he's pushing taxes for the under $250k block to new levels and not offering alternatives that are going to ideally get them some of that money back.

[JerseySean]

Yes, but it's also realistic. This country is just getting bigger and bigger and more expensive, yet somehow the myth of being able to have everyone continually pay less and less taxes is somehow gospel. It's simply not feasable if anyone expects this country to be able to want to pay for anything and still have a leg to stand on. It's not like he's raising them across the bard to levels we've never seen...it's going back to levels we've dealt with before for people under a certain income level. That's how it has to be. Bush's stupid tax cuts were a ridiculous idea that caused FAR more damage than anyone they "helped." You're spinning this to make it sound like he's pushing taxes for the under $250k block to new levels and not offering alternatives that are going to ideally get them some of that money back.

Brilliant explanation! Honestly, while I disagree, it is a good explanation. Why hasnt Obama made that case to the American people? Is this intentionally misleading America?

[TheMojoPin]

Brilliant explanation! Honestly, while I disagree, it is a good explanation. Why hasnt Obama made that case to the American people? Is this intentionally misleading America?

Because the mantra of "more taxes" can't be heard on that platform without it being taken or twisted as you did higher up this page. It's political suicide, no matter how much it makes sense.

[JerseySean]

Because the mantra of "more taxes" can't be heard on that platform without it being taken or twisted as you did higher up this page. It's political suicide, no matter how much it makes sense.

But many American are voting for him because they think he will not raise their taxes. He has mislead America to try to win an election.

[TheMojoPin]

But many American are voting for him because they think he will not raise their taxes. He has mislead America to try to win an election.

He's never hidden the necessity of rolling back the Bush tax cuts. His tax plan is in direct response to that by lessening the burden and impact it'll have on earners under $250k (especially those under $200k).

[JerseySean]

He's never hidden the necessity of rolling back the Bush tax cuts. His tax plan is in direct response to that by lessening the burden and impact it'll have on earners under $250k (especially those under $200k).

How is he lessening the burdon for those? Their taxes will still go up. If you make less than $8025 per year, dont worry Obama will raise your taxes 5%. And that $500 increase in the child tax credit, yea lets cut that back too. Good guy Obama is.

[TheMojoPin]

How is he lessening the burdon for those? Their taxes will still go up.

...

You're just willfully ignoring the scope of the tax plan by posting this.

[brettmojo]

But many American are voting for him because they think he will not raise their taxes. He has mislead America to try to win an election.
I'll take that over being mislead just to wage a war.

[JerseySean]

...

You're just willfully ignoring the scope of the tax plan by posting this.

How so? If you make 8k per year, your tax burden is $800 annually and if you have a child, the tax credit is $1000. Under Obama you will pay $1200 annually and get the tax credit cut to $500. That is a wing of $900 annually for a working poor mother who is going to vote for Obama thinking her life is going to get easier.

[TheMojoPin]

How so? If you make 8k per year, your tax burden is $800 annually and if you have a child, the tax credit is $1000. Under Obama you will pay $1200 annually and get the tax credit cut to $500. That is a wing of $900 annually for a working poor mother who is going to vote for Obama thinking her life is going to get easier.

What?

[brettmojo]

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1031268,CST-NWS-tax30.article

The rich would pay more under Barack Obama's tax plan, and the poor and middle-class would pay less, a nonpartisan analysis finds. Under John McCain's plan, the rich would pay much less than they do now, the poor and middle-class would pay a bit less, and the federal deficit would grow, the study found.

Each individual's tax situation is different, so it's hard to say for sure how much more or less you would pay under the presidential candidates' ever-evolving tax proposals.

<!-- BlogBurst ContentEnd --> <!-- start sidebar --> <!-- BlogBurst ContentStart --> And at this point that's all they are -- proposals that may or may not get through Congress. They don't take into account wars, whether the president will sign an expensive social program into law, or the world economy.

With those caveats, here are highlights of how the candidates' proposals to change the tax code would impact you:

Obama says he would hike several taxes on people making more than $250,000, including the amount they pay on capital gains. Currently, the top income tax rate is 35 percent. Under Obama, that would go back up to 39 percent. Obama's staff told the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center he would raise the rates for people in the top two brackets -- about 2.5 million filers out of 100 million-plus. People in those high tax brackets would see the tax rate on their capital gains hiked from the current 15 percent to 20-28 percent.

Obama started his campaign saying his plans would not increase taxes for people earning less than $250,000. But he found himself in an apparent contradiction by saying he would tax all income to fund Social Security, not just income up to $102,000, as is now the case. So now, Obama's plan calls for no Social Security tax on income between $102,000 and $250,000, but all income above $250,000 would be taxed for Social Security.

The 95 percent-plus of the American population that earns less than $250,000 would see the following tax breaks: A $500-per-worker tax credit for people who earn less than $150,000 and do not itemize, and a $4,000 credit per child in college. Seniors who earn less than $50,000 would pay no income tax.

The Tax Policy Center notes seniors could end up paying more if corporations respond to Obama's proposed increase in the corporate tax rate by passing those costs along to consumers.

McCain would make permanent most of the tax cuts President Bush has already enacted, including those that benefit the middle class, such as elimination of the marriage penalty and the increase in child credits. He would also keep cuts that benefit the wealthy, such as the elimination of the highest tax brackets. Obama would keep the breaks for the middle class but not the ones for the wealthy.

McCain would also double the dependent exemption from $3,500 to $7,000, benefitting big families of all incomes.

Obama would leave the top corporate tax rate at 35 percent. McCain would cut it to 25 percent.

The two candidates differ widely in their approach to the estate tax, which the Republicans call the "death tax." McCain would set it at 15 percent for estates above $5 million. Obama would set it at 45 percent for estates above $3.5 million.

Both candidates favor extending a "patch" that would keep the Alternative Minimum Tax from encroaching on middle-income families.
Largely because his tax proposals would leave tax breaks for the wealthy in place, McCain's plan would cost the U.S. Treasury more than Obama's, the Tax Policy Center found.

The precise cost depends on whether you assume the current tax breaks would be renewed or would expire.

Assuming they would have been renewed anyway, Obama's plan would bring in an additional $700 billion in taxes over the next 10 years, while McCain's would cost the Treasury $600 billion. Assuming legislators would have let the tax breaks expire, Obama's plan would cost the U.S. Treasury $2.7 trillion and McCain's $3.7 trillion.

The center uses various assumptions both campaigns quarrel with. Each campaign also accuses the other of not being honest with the numbers.
"Obama raises taxes in a way that's detrimental to the economy," said McCain adviser Douglas Holtz-Eakin. "The John McCain plan is a jobs-first plan that keeps small businesses in the game."

Obama's Brian Deese said the $600 million deficit the study pro- jects McCain's plan would create "doesn't count impact of current Iraq war spending. If McCain's plan drives the deficit up and puts upward pressure on interest rates, that increases costs for families and could force really Draconian, across-the-board spending cuts."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/28/AR2008102802955.html

How should an honest fiscal conservative see the situation? For those making less than roughly $200,000 ($250,000 for couples), Obama would not only make President Bush (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/George+W.+Bush?tid=informline)'s tax cuts permanent but would also offer an array of new tax credits. Nobody should deny this.

[albo60s]

Higher electric bills for all!!! Oh boy!!!!
Nearly half the electricity is generated by coal. MASSIVE utility bill increases comming under the messiah!!!!!



http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public...until now. Here is the transcript of Obama's statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine):

Let me sort of describe my overall policy.

What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there.

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted

[TheMojoPin]

Higher electric bills for all!!! Oh boy!!!!
Nearly half the electricity is generated by coal. MASSIVE utility bill increases comming under the messiah!!!!!



http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

Wow, that site is a winner.

Are there any other sources of info on this?

[Jujubees2]

http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1031268,CST-NWS-tax30.article

Please stop contradicting SeanJohns posts with facts. We all know that Republicans lower taxes all the time (especially for large corporations which helps the economy right?) and the Dems just want to raise your taxes so that they can give it to crackheads.

[brettmojo]

and the Dems just want to raise your taxes so that they can give it to crackheads.
You mean community organizers?

[albo60s]

Wow, that site is a winner.

Are there any other sources of info on this?


Did you listen to the audio clip???

http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

[TheMojoPin]

Did you listen to the audio clip???

http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

I did. If there's something to it, it'll show up elsewhere. Right now it's pretty suspect. I'd need to see some analysis that expands beyond an edited, out of context YouTube clip. I can only assume it regards the cap & trade proposal, which McCain also supports, which is probably why McCain has done nothing with this if they knew about it.

[epo]

Did you listen to the audio clip???

http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry

You are obviously focusing on the "bankrupt" word. You should listen to the tape and hear this clip:

The only thing I've said with respect to coal, I haven't been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.

What a radical! A mainstream politician whom desires clean energy.

[albo60s]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR0qC6bvT3E

Listen

[TheMojoPin]

We have listened. We need the full video or the full transcript to actually judge what this is. Why would anyone trust a chopped up video/audio clip? YouTube and blogger sites are packed with tons of Obama clips and videos that were spun out of control.

[JerseySean]

What?

Working poor, single mother.

Makes 8,000 per year

Today

Pays $800 taxes
Gets a $1000 tax credit

$8200 per year

Under Obama

Pays $1200
Gets $500 tax credit

$7300 per year

Shes better off today

[brettmojo]

Working poor, single mother.

Makes 8,000 per year

Today

Pays $800 taxes
Gets a $1000 tax credit

$8200 per year

Under Obama

Pays $1200
Gets $500 tax credit

$7300 per year

Shes better off today

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...102802955.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/28/AR2008102802955.html)

How should an honest fiscal conservative see the situation? For those making less than roughly $200,000 ($250,000 for couples), Obama would not only make President Bush (http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/related/topic/George+W.+Bush?tid=informline)'s tax cuts permanent but would also offer an array of new tax credits. Nobody should deny this.

[JerseySean]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uR0qC6bvT3E

Listen

I have, but what you have to understand is that He is the Messiah. So anything negative about him must be a bad source, etc. Did Mojo say that it hasnt been reported anywhere else? Because the press has been so quick to criticize.

[JerseySean]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...102802955.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/28/AR2008102802955.html)
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-01-obama-iowa_N.htm

[brettmojo]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-01-obama-iowa_N.htm
Hmmm...

During an hour-long talk, Obama promoted eliminating some of the income tax cuts enacted under President Bush, but resisted characterizing them as a tax increase.
The Illinois senator said that as president, he would roll back income tax cuts for higher incomes to pay for his policy proposals.

[epo]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-01-obama-iowa_N.htm

You quote an article from 2007, I'll give you a link to Senator Obama's tax plan itself (http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf).

You and the rest of the Grover Norquist disciples should try reading the tax plan before you lie about it.

[TheMojoPin]

I have, but what you have to understand is that He is the Messiah. So anything negative about him must be a bad source, etc. Did Mojo say that it hasnt been reported anywhere else? Because the press has been so quick to criticize.

Are you kidding me?

Even if what you just spouted was true, why didn't any other candidate touch it?

Hmmmmm, it couldn't possibly be that this is just spun excerpts of Obama talking about cap & trade, SOMETHING THEY ALL (MCCAIN INCLUDED) ARE PROPOSING, could it?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[epo]

Hmmm...

Don't YOU get it MAN?

Obama is going to possibly raise HIS taxes....so we're all screwed!

[JerseySean]

Don't YOU get it MAN?

Obama is going to possibly raise HIS taxes....so we're all screwed!

I wish dude. I wish I was in that bracket.

[celery]

I have, but what you have to understand is that He is the Messiah. So anything negative about him must be a bad source, etc. Did Mojo say that it hasnt been reported anywhere else? Because the press has been so quick to criticize.

Take the bet.

[JerseySean]

Are you kidding me?

Even if what you just spouted was true, why didn't any other candidate touch it?

Hmmmmm, it couldn't possibly be that this is just spun excerpts of Obama talking about cap & trade, SOMETHING THEY ALL (MCCAIN INCLUDED) ARE PROPOSING, could it?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=as.wTY1nJKPI&refer=home
http://www.wsaz.com/home/headlines/33726759.html

http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/13-0&fp=490e738c03251979&ei=fmgOSZy_JILUyQSsrtCKDg&url=http%3A//voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/02/mccain_in_pennsylvania_im_a_co.html&cid=1265904939&usg=AFQjCNEkeAhpGEBBde1edOhWylb6MihuNA

If you want more, please do a google search.

[TheMojoPin]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=as.wTY1nJKPI&refer=home
http://www.wsaz.com/home/headlines/33726759.html

http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/13-0&fp=490e738c03251979&ei=fmgOSZy_JILUyQSsrtCKDg&url=http%3A//voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/02/mccain_in_pennsylvania_im_a_co.html&cid=1265904939&usg=AFQjCNEkeAhpGEBBde1edOhWylb6MihuNA

If you want more, please do a google search.

Hey, you know where can go for McCain and his cap & trade plan?

TO HIS OWN FREAKIN' WEBSITE. (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm)

McCain wants to "transition away from coal entirely."

[JerseySean]

Hey, you know where can go for McCain and his cap & trade plan?

TO HIS OWN FREAKIN' WEBSITE. (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm)

McCain wants to "transition away from coal entirely."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/b/a/2008/11/02/nov05election-lies_half_truth_2.DTL

Read this. Nothing is out of context.

I dont believe a word that this "reporter", Marinucci writes. She is the worst of the worst in the media.

[brettmojo]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=as.wTY1nJKPI&refer=home
http://www.wsaz.com/home/headlines/33726759.html

http://news.google.com/news/url?sa=t&ct=us/13-0&fp=490e738c03251979&ei=fmgOSZy_JILUyQSsrtCKDg&url=http%3A//voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/02/mccain_in_pennsylvania_im_a_co.html&cid=1265904939&usg=AFQjCNEkeAhpGEBBde1edOhWylb6MihuNA

If you want more, please do a google search.

After John McCain said he'd like to `transition away from coal entirely,' his campaign is hardly in a position to criticize a coal-state senator like Barack Obama who has outlined a $150 billion investment in clean coal and other technologies to create jobs and build a new energy economy,'' Strickland said in a statement.

Nah, see that quote wasn't taken out of context at all.

Some environmental advocates questioned why McCain -- who spoke frequently about the need to curb climate change during the primary season but has largely jettisoned that line in favor of one touting oil drilling -- is pushing for increased coal production, since it's one of the main drivers of global warming.

It's called desperation.

[JerseySean]

Hey, you know where can go for McCain and his cap & trade plan?

TO HIS OWN FREAKIN' WEBSITE. (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/da151a1c-733a-4dc1-9cd3-f9ca5caba1de.htm)

McCain wants to "transition away from coal entirely."

Does he want to bankrupt it? I dont see that there.

[brettmojo]

Does he want to bankrupt it? I dont see that there.
Nah. It's a big business. He probably wants to give it tax cuts and a nice multibillion dollar "bail out".

[JerseySean]

Nah. It's a big business. He probably wants to give it tax cuts In order to create jobs and help the economy of PA and OH stay strong while Obama wants to "bankrupt" one of the biggest industries in the region

Fixed

[epo]

Fixed

I'll give you this JS....it's gotta suck trying to polish the turd that the McCain campaign has become.