Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

POLL: Daily Tracking (8/23-25)


Gallup Poll
8/23-25/08; 2,684 RV, 2%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews

National
McCain 46, Obama 44


Rasmussen Reports
8/23-25/08; 3,000 LV, 2%
Mode: IVR

National
McCain 46, Obama 46

 

Comments
marctx:

Am I reading that right? McCain leading during the Biden/convention bounce?

____________________

TheVoice_99:

Probably the brain-dead pumas skewing the results after the biden pick....sore losers.

____________________

SwingVote:

If I am not wrong, Gallup tracking showed 2 pts Obama lead a few days ago. Does anybody beleive 5% change is possible in a week?

Daily tracking polls do not tell much unless you are looking for a trend. I think it is a very tight game, which makes daily tracking polls less meaningful.

____________________

ca-indp:

TheVoice_99:
Keep up ur foul language and that is what will happen in Nov also.
U think dumbf--ks like u are going to get NObama any more votes. He is going down thanks to morons like u.


____________________

ca-indp:

In Biden's words:
"Obama is not ready to be the president", I agree.

What a ticket these idiot Dems have chosen in a year they had the best chance to win!!.

Sure LOSERs.

____________________

saywhat90:

marctx

you keep hollerin about a bounce like its already happened. daily tracking are not good indicators of where the electorate is.other polls have barack leading. which tells you one thing. noone knows who going to win. its not trending either way. usa today/gallup had mccain up 5 and now he down 3. so to put an end to it there is not mccain trend. there is no obama trend. there are simply different polls that have going back and forth for months now. neither will get a real bounce. and if they do so what. doesnt mean the election is over. it isnt over till nov 4. even if polls one of them up by 15 it still isnt over till nov 4

____________________

KipTin:

Probably, the previous Obama leaners were "disappointed" in the VP pick.

Really, funny. If the leaners and undecided move to McCain, then only Obamanation will be the real "sore losers."

Strange results though. There was supposed to be a pre-convention bump (did not happen), a VP bump (did not happen), and now we are waiting to see if there is a convention bump. And that last bump will be limited to a very short time span because the Republican VP pick (this Friday?) and their convention begins September 2.

____________________

When the post mortem of this election cycle is written, Obama's ill-conceived, ill-fated 3am text message will be seen as the pivotal moment it all started sliding downhill. Pure hubris.

____________________

ca-indp:

Ciccina,
I agree, it was pure non-sense, but expected from NObama. He has nothing else to offer.

____________________

Sergei Groinka:

Wow... Great news.... I hope Romney as VP will seal the race for McCain. ODumbO can cry and blame that no one voted for him b'coz of racism.

____________________

KipTin:

Hey... saywhat90....Daily tracking in fact does record "bumps" because it is "daily" tracking (using a compilation of 3 days). Gallup and Rasmussen are the most useful for spotting trends. No polls can predict outcomes in an election over 2 months from now, but they certainly do illustrate where the race stands at that moment.

____________________

Stillow:

McCain needs to send Obama a bottle of wine and a thank you card for picking Biden. Biden is oppositte to everything Obama is about. Bad pick by the Obama camp.
He should get a bounce from his speech later this week. He delivers a scripted speech better than most. I just don't think he can hold on to it. I still think McCain pulls away a bit when the debates start.

____________________

TheVoice_99:

pathetic pumas will see a major backlash against clinton for decades if they don't get on board. if obama loses hillary will be blamed and will have no chance in 2012. YOU THINK 1 AA OR REAL OBAMA SUPPORTER WILL VOTE FOR HER????????

THEY WILL HOLD IT AGAINST HER, BILL, AND PROBABLY CHELSEA TOO.....GO AHEAD AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS LOSERS.

Oh and by the way, mccain has now said he is against ALL forms of abortion, even rape and incest. Yiikes, have fun with that puma twats. Hope your daughters don't get raped - the liberal justices on the court are leaving soon - and it will be open season on roe v wade. Have fun with your choice - Mr. Misogyny!!!!

____________________

SwingVote:

Let's assume that what Republicans or sore loser Hillary supporters are right on these:
- Obama has no experience
- He is very very leftist elitist out of touch
- He is racist
- He is idiot
- Biden was the worst mistake you can do.
- He is arrogant and cocky
- He puts his ambition in front of his country
..

On the other hand
- McCain is a great man and POW

Even under this circumstances, Obama leads the national average by 1-2%. Don't you think something is wrong here?

____________________

Adam_Il:

Obama hit a nail in his coffin by not picking Clinton. This guy is so over confident that will eventually prove to be his undoing. That's good in a way, since Clinton can run again in 2012. Meanwhile, I think Mccain is much more qualified to fill in for 4 years.

____________________

rdw4potus:

Marctx,

No, you're not really reading that right. At least not in terms of a convention bounce. Any bounce would come during or immediately after the convention, and this poll was conducted before the convention began (with the possible exception of some west-coast calling last night).

____________________

zotz:

No point in grousing about it. This is the Biden bounce... towards McCain. How permanent is it? We will know by the end of the week.
Adam Il may be right but I think the economy and the war still are the main issues.

Obama could have put the election away but he decided he couldn't work with Clinton. OK, take a deep breath. This will be a two month long bar room brawl complete with eye gouging, ear biting, groin kicking action!

WHAT FUN!

____________________

saywhat90:

@kiptin

the daily tracker is not the leading indicator for trends.most polls with the exception of cnn have a 3 to 4 point lead for obama. they are never consistent one way or the other.once again people keep hollering about a bounce. ii m not looking for a bounce. all i look for is consistent polling trend towards one candidate or the other. i have not seen that yet. neither is in the position that they are assured victory. and just because it seems close doesnt mean either candidate is in trouble. just means its close. placing your bets on a generic dems vs repubs poll is being misled. when there is a actual face invloved the race is alot different. mccain is well known and barack isnt. but again neither has shown an absolute advantage.

____________________

marctx:

hopefully, for the DNC's sake Biden can plagiarize a really good speech and pull this thing out after all.

Hillary's making an appearance on the DNC CONVENTION COMEDY SHOW tonight. Lets see what she has to say and if any of her supporters believe it. I know she has to say what she has to say so people like Voice won't be mad when she runs in 2012.

____________________

OGLiberal:

@marctx:

It's too early to see any kind of convention bounce. Both of these polls cover a) Saturday, where the Biden pick disappointed many Hillary supporters, b) Sunday, when the Biden pick was discussed by the teevee talking heads, c) Monday afternoon, where the teevee talking heads spent all day talking about party chaos and how Bill and Hill are still pissed. Let's assume that the Ted and Michelle speeches last night may have won over some former Hillary supporters. That wouldn't be reflected in these polls. Similarly, if Hillary comes out strong in her support for Obama tonight, urging her supporters to get behind him, that won't be reflected in tomorrow's tracking polls - too late.

@Stillow:

An Obama/Clinton team in the WH would be a disaster, regardless of the potential short-term electoral benefit. Obama wouldn't let her be co-president (nor should he be expected to) so she would then seek to undermine him, with Bill always lurking in the background. Besides, her talents and strengths would be wasted in that position and I don't think she wanted it anyway.

The only VP pick that would have made the Hillary holdouts happy was Clinton. And that couldn't happen for the above reasons. Bayh - he's a Clinton buddy, why not just pick Hillary? Sebelius - If you wanted a woman, why not just pick Hillary? Kaine - he's too inexperienced, like you, why not just pick Hillary? Biden represents a short-term hit for a long-term benefit - a necessary attack do with strong foreign policy experience.

@ All Hillary Holdouts

At the end of the day, Hillary lost the primary by the rules laid out before it started, rules she agreed to. The Hillary holdouts can talk all they want about MI & FL, and the popular vote, and the silliness of caucuses, but Hillary - and her supporters - knew all of this going in and didn't voice any objections at the time. Obama won the most delegates and, as such, he won the nomination. Period. Full stop. Had Hillary's team organized a bit more in the caucus states, had they objected to the MI/FL exclusions before the voting started, they probably could have won this thing running away. They did't. And she lost. The Dems now have a candidate. If you believe in what Hillary believes, you'll either vote for him or write Hillary's name in come November 4. Or maybe you'll stay home. But voting for McCain means you don't share Hillary's beliefs. It's that simple.

____________________

saywhat90:

i will be voting for obama to make it clear my choice. but i am also a realist. im not going to try and spin these numbers to make my choice for pres look better. the numbers are what they are. but i look at all the polls.and from what i gather mccain has made some gains but he has made some losses. same for obama. state to state the polls have not really given either a significant advantage.

____________________

douglasfactors:

I've noticed there are two kinds of comments here: (1) good faith analysis of poll results, and (2) trash-talking.

I've also noticed which side (2) is coming from.

____________________

ca-indp:

Voice_99:
Who cares what you Obama morons or AA voters do in the future. U have nowhere else to go.
U will come back to vote for Dems even if PUMAs make u lose this time.

LOL!!

____________________

TheVoice_99:

Wanna bet moron?


Couldn't you say the same of puma tards?

Kinda sad imagining a bunch of middle-aged/elderly women backing a guy who is a misogynist and likes to tell rape jokes in his spare time. He is so anti-woman, it is kinda like a jew supporting a nazi for president. Too Funny!!!

____________________

TR in VA:

really no way of getting around this.

I am wondering part of this isnt about Russia making More threatening noises

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080826/wl_afp/georgiarussiaconflict_080826182838;_ylt=AlhGIZ08jT7YmYY36oIqL.KWwvIE

MOSCOW (AFP) - Russia on Tuesday formally recognised the Georgian rebel regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states in a startling new challenge to the West that drew a hail of criticism.

President Dmitry Medvedev's declaration in a televised address prompted bursts of celebratory gunfire on the streets of South Ossetia and Abkhazia but strong censure from the United States and the European Union.

In Georgia, President Mikheil Saakashvili lambasted the Russian move as an "attempt to wipe Georgia from the map" and promised a "peaceful struggle" against Russia's decision.

Medvedev was unapologetic, saying when asked if he feared a new Cold War: "We're not afraid of anything."

____________________

Uri:

@Voice_99:

Even current Obama supporters may think differently in eight years. Look at how the Kennedies and Carter are all preaching unity and sucking up to Obama when you had the JFK/LBJ fight and then Ted Kennedy's attempt to steal the nomination from Carter.


The interesting thing about the national surveys is that usually a VP pick ups a candidate, especially going into the convention. The pickup may be whatever Obama gets from his great speech in Invesco field, and minus all the people who are disgusted by the communist-Russia style roll call.

I really don't understand this. Does Obama's ego not allow him to win by the same marging he originally won? Does he really need to make it seem like Clinton barely get any votes? Do people not know it was close ?

____________________

Uri:

@SwingVote: In a country where John Kerry gets swiftboated by GWB, everything is possible :)

____________________

TheVoice_99:

Oh no, scary russians, oh no, we need a 80 year old that is experiencing early alzheimers to run the show. his pow experience 40 years ago will light the way. never mind he supported the worst foreign policy blunder in the history of this country. we need the old guy whose brain is degrading......

____________________

TheVoice_99:

Uri-

The race was over in february. the clinton people put out bs making it seem like she had a chance making dems waste millions on a race that was long over. the media helped them out since it is all about ratings with them.


hillary is lucky to even get a roll call. she lost - either get on board or face the consequences. or go be a retardlican. your choice.

____________________

Stillow:

@Uri

Had Kerry not thrown away his medals and testified that our troops are war criminals, the swiftboat thing would not have stuck. The left claims its "negative" to point out what the other guy has done or said.

____________________

marctx:

Voice_99

It's so nice to have you speaking on behalf of Obama. You should really ask for a raise.

Hillary Clinton and her supporters could have a roll call if she wanted and there is nothing Obama could do about it. She is just doing her duty as a democrat and trying to do this comedy skit to help the poor dude.

____________________

RS:

People seriously need to take a chill-pill and read more-informed opinions, such as:
/blogs/measuring_the_bounce.html
[Links to Mark B's National Journal column.]

Ciccina: You keep pushing that "3 AM text" drivel - just isn't true. By the way, have you ever stopped to think whether Clinton was right to even put out that ad? As Reagan said, "thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow [Party-member]."

It isn't like Obama is the only person to blame, and the Clintons probably did far more to feed the GOP ad-machine (Bill, even as recently as a few days back). But PUMAs don't want to see that.

____________________

thoughtful:

@everyone

I have never ever read so much reaction based on so little. McCain unusually gets to 46% in a poll!

Its a tight race with 25% of the Democrat vote loose. 50% of the Independent loose. Maybe 15% of the Republican vote loose. That's a lot of undecided and churn (25%-30% of the electorate).

Goodness me this is the best thing that could have happened at this time, the various factions in the Democratic Party are going to unite behind on one platform.

"The country can not afford to have 4 more years of a Republican Presidency" Hillary's message tonight as well as hammering home the repressive (my word) nature of a McCain regressive domestic and economic presidency.

The General is going to be just as much fun as the Democratic Primaries.

____________________

ca-indp:

Voice_99:
Oh ya you idiot, if the race was over in Feb, then how come obama lost big time in the last 10 primaries. Oh these voters don't matter because they don't buy Obama's BS.

You dimwits with blinders are going to help Obama lose. You should be his spokesman!

____________________

TheVoice_99:

marctx - why don't you write in bush this time around. worked well the first two times......

____________________

ca-indp:

the Nov election is for Dems to lose. Reps were going not expected to win anyway.
Obama morons like on this blod will help Dems achieve.
They are good at snatching defeat from the jawas of Victory.
Even with lousy economy and Iraq mess, McCain is even with Obama.
There should more idiots like Voice_99 for Obama.

____________________

ca-indp:

the Nov election is for Dems to lose. Reps were going not expected to win anyway.
Obama morons like on this blog will help Dems achieve.
They are good at snatching defeat from the jawas of Victory.
Even with lousy economy and Iraq mess, McCain is even with Obama.
There should more idiots like Voice_99 for Obama.

____________________

RS: I am not "pushing" any "drivel." The Gallup article itself refers to the 3am message. Further, this Wall Street Journal article confirms the same. (See below). Do your research before you start insulting people. Its not like I haven't shown you this link before (elsewhere).

The 3am ad was perfectly appropriate in the context of a contested primary. There was nothing unusual or remarkable about that ad. Why you quote Ronald Reagan is a mystery.

The GOP doesn't need "feeding" by the Clintons. Don't be absurd. Do you think the GOP wouldn't have figured out on their own that Obama has zero experience with foreign policy, etc?

-----
Here's your 3am reference.

"At about 3 a.m., Obama headquarters dispatched the message, which named Sen. Joseph Biden. It was relayed through servers at Distributive Networks' office to phone companies, and from there to cellphones across the U.S. "I'm not sure if that was the optimum time," said Mr. Bertram. "But that's when the campaign decided to send it."

["Mr. Bertram is chief executive of Distributive Networks, a Washington, D.C.-based mobile technology firm the campaign hired to send out its text messages -- including the one it had said it would use to break the news of Sen. Obama's vice-presidential selection."]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121944790472265161.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

____________________

player:

The Obama camp's actions leading up to convention seemed a little odd. They looked nervous, and the Biden pick almost confirms it. One could only guess that their private polls were reflecting a falling away from his base of support. Its wasn't only the white voters, but the black voters as well.

____________________

Stillow:

I gotta say its fun watching you hillary supporters beat up on the obama supporters and vice versa.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

The community on this site suddenly got unbearable.

____________________

Tybo:

RS, did you read the gallup poll?.. it refers to the negative reaction towards obama's frat boy mentality 3am announcement.

it was an immature , idiotic , nasty , debasing
and obama like thing to do.

____________________

sherman:

You guys are funny.

____________________

faithhopelove:

Today's 3 national polls find Obama +4, McCain +2, and a dead-even race. They're a wash. Moreover, they are all pre-convention polls.

At the more important state level, there is an interesting poll here:
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/54_21/news/27581-1.html

This poll shows McCain ahead of Obama in a red district of CO by just 2 points. If this district turns blue, then Obama will almost certainly win CO.

Also, SurveyUSA has just released new Bush job approval ratings:

MN: 32%
MO: 33%
NM: 32%
OH: 28%
VA: 41%
WI: 36%
IA: 33%

Given that one of Obama's primary messages is that McCain = 4 or 8 more years of Bush, these polls are relevant. They indicate that McCain will have difficulty holding OH, and that Obama will have difficulty flipping VA. Also, McCain is more likely to flip WI than MN--unless, of course, he picks Pawlenty as his running mate.

____________________

marctx:

Is BILL CLINTON going to endorse McCain?

DENVER — Bill Clinton appeared to undermine Sen. Barack Obama again Tuesday.

The former president, speaking in Denver, posed a hypothetical question in which he seemed to suggest that that the Democratic Party was making a mistake in choosing Obama as its presidential nominee.

He said: "Suppose you're a voter, and you've got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don't think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?"

Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: "This has nothing to do with what's going on now."

____________________

mirrorball:

Maybe I misread the Gallup poll. But I see nothing about "negative reaction towards obama's frat boy mentality 3am announcement." I see that it says the poll took place after the 3 a.m. announcement, but it doesn't explicitly link the new numbers with the timing of the announcement. And it also says this is "not a statistically significant improvement over [McCain's] recent range from 43% to 45%"

____________________

faithhopelove:

Charles Franklin has reported that the Rasmussen tracker and the Gallup tracker are among the most favorable toward McCain due to "house effects." See:
/blogs/how_pollsters_affect_poll_resu.html

____________________

Patrick:

You can spin this tracking poll however you like, but the fact of the matter is Obama is underperforming where any Democrat should be by a huge percentage. Even all the left-leaning networks that love him are openly admitting it. Some of it may well be Clinton supporters (like me) who would rather just wait 4 years for a competent Democratic candidate (preferably Clinton). Some of it is probably that McCain has a long history of being moderate and independent, so he's not "scary" like Bush. And there may be some racism sprinkled in (at least in certain states). But the REALITY is Obama has very little experience and a very UNIMPRESSIVE record. If you really take a look at what he's accomplished in his entire political career (e.g. how many bills he's sponsored/gotten passed; how many committees he's chaired, etc), it's not only unimpressive; it shows a patter of downright laziness. Contrary to how he explained it, his number of "present" votes (in which he wouldn't take a stance) in IL was extremely high compared to his colleagues. He's just like the guy in high school who gets elected president of the senior class because of his magnetism and promises. There's an old saying: "Don't tell me what you're going to do. Tell me what you've done". If more American voters start tuning in to actual accomplishments (and not just speeches), the Democratic Party may finally learn its lesson, learn to select winning candidates for a change, and McCain will be on his way to one mediocre (but certainly better than Bush) term. Hillary will be back in 2012. Just you watch.

____________________

faithhopelove:

One hidden factor in discerning a candidate's level of support is campaign contributions. Persons who have given money to a candidate are probably more likely to follow through and actually cast a vote for that candidate on election day. After all, they have made an investment.

Consider this factor in some swing states:

IA ~ Obama has raised $400,000 more than McCain;

NM ~ Obama has raised almost $900,000 more than McCain;

CO ~ Obama has raised about 1.5 million dollars more than McCain;

OH ~ Obama has raised almost $300,000 more than McCain;

VA ~ Obama has raised almost 1 million dollars more than McCain.

Recent polls indicate that these states represent Obama's best bets at flips from 2004. His fundraising suggests that many people in these states have invested in him; these people are very likely voters.

In Obama's second-tier states, he has out-raised McCain in AK, MT, MO, IN, and NC.

See:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/map/

____________________

captamericausa:

Barack 260 electoral votes
McCain 176 electoral votes

Hmmmmm?

____________________

RS:

@mirrorball:
Thanks for pointing out where Ciccina and Tybo were wrong - all Gallup does is say the polling was done post-Biden announcement.

@Ciccina:
Are you kidding me? Look at all the GOP ads out that star Senator Clinton. If that's not feeding the GOP ad-machine, what is? Robert Gibbs has admitted that CNN forced their hand, otherwise they'd have sent it out at 8 AM ET. But of course, you wouldn't believe that, would you?

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/25/cnn-forces-obama-to-release-vp-pick-early-2/

A Democrat who is apparently anguished over Gore's loss, but now refuses to support Obama - if that's not PUMA, I don't know what is. I am not insulting you, just sayin' it like it is.

It is almost funny, if the consequences were not so serious, watching Clinton supporters who accused Obama supporters of being a personality cult, either stay home or vote McCain, despite the vast gap between Obama and McCain on the issues. Who's caught in a cult-of-personality now?

Recalcitrant Clintonistas - the Naderites of 2008.

____________________

faithhopelove:

Patrick:

Thank you for admitting that racism is a factor in this election.

As for your prediction that McCain is on his way to one term, if you are right, then tonight's big speeches--by Hillary and Mark Warner--may be a preview of the Democratic contest in 2012.

McCain undeniably has more experience than Obama--he's much older than Obama. McCain also seems more likely to start wars with Iran and Russia--which many voters do find "scary."

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

this site has become a McCain/Republican echo chamber. It's not wonder that most of the world hates us.

But why should we care, right? We are the big bad United States, and nobody can mess with us. We'll just bomb them. Or something.

____________________

KipTin:

Very interesting about the fundraising...but it does not break it down between pre-convention and post convention available money. In other words, Obama's contributions are for both ($2300 max each per individual = total $4600 possible), whereas McCain is only receiving donations for pre-convention (limited to $2300) because he opted into public financing.

____________________

SwingVote:

Mike_in_CA:

"But why should we care, right? We are the big bad United States, and nobody can mess with us. We'll just bomb them. Or something."


Good point.

Republicans talk about how tough they are on national security. Russia invaded Georgia and got what they want. What did the Republican administration do? NOTHING! If USA was the USA in 2000, Russia would not even think about it. They were not even able to help Serbia.

____________________

Excuse me, RS, but I said the Gallup article references the 3am call. That is true. You have yet to apologize for misrepresenting what I said, nor have you admitted you were wrong. This is beneath you, as are the pointless insults.

By the way, I am not insulted by being called a PUMA. I am a PUMA. That is true.

What I am not is dishonest. Go back, read carefully, and think about it.

____________________

Tybo:

mirrorball:
Maybe I misread the Gallup poll

.....
finally something we can all agree with!

:)

____________________

thoughtful:

Ciccina

What you think is not really worthy of civilized comment is it?

____________________

Stillow:

@Mike_in_CA

You still can't stand it that not everyone thinks like you do. Its that blasted common sense getting i nthe way of your leftist utopia again.
Oh those evil republicans and there bombs. I'm not sure if I should laugh at you or cry for you.

____________________

Tybo:

"but it does not break it down between pre-convention and post convention available money."

lol! no analysis of the facts allowed!

____________________

jradMIT:

For all you PUMA's out there, I understand your emotion and frustration, but looking past the next few years to 2012 for Hillary is a terrible thing to do. One of Hillary's main platforms was health care reform. Obama is much closer to her on this than McCain who's healthcare plan is just increasing the standard tax deduction, big help. But if you are going to wait four years. Think about this, how many children will die because they don't get the access to health care that they need? How many families will lose their homes because break apart at the seams when they can't afford to pay for an unexpected illness or accident? How many families will mourn the loss of loved one killed in Iraq? Four years is too long for many people. It is much more serious for these people than the hard feelings leftover from a primary. If you believed in Hillary and her platform which main planks were Health Care Reform and a responsible exit in Iraq, then a vote for McCain flies in the face of everything she stood for. I beg you Puma's to put everything in perspective and not vote for Obama because of party ID, but because that you care about the children in America and our soldiers abroad.

____________________

RS:

@Ciccina:
How very Clintonian of you! Parse well, my friend.

You said Obama's "3 AM text" will be the pivotal moment.
Then, in response to my post questioning the "3 AM text = hubris" message you push, you say "Gallup also references the 3 AM text."

That pretty clearly insinuates (as Tybo picked up) that Gallup says the 3 AM text was a pivotal turning point, supporting your original supposition. So I am not wrong, I don't think.

Just to be clear, I never said you are dishonest, I am just saying you misread the situation. I apologize if my original post wasn't clear in that regard.

Thanks for acknowledging you are a PUMA, so now I know where you stand.

By the way, you rely on Murdoch's WSJ - which really wants McCain to win, and is anti-progressive - to give you the truth about the text message. What's next - the Pittsburgh Trib-Rev?

____________________

Stillow:

@jradMIT

You are absolutely dilusional. If you don't vote for Obama you want kids to die, people to lose there homes and more soldiers to be killed? You are sick.

____________________

Uri:

@jradMIT: Do you really think Obama believes in solving the healthcare crisis ? He only picked that topic and invented a half-assed plan so he could neutralize Hillary's greatest asset and the thing she had been pushing for the past 16 years.

If you want to know Obama's stance on healthcare, look at Michelle and Axelrod's work in Chicago: A PR campaign to get poor people to go to community centers instead of real hospitals so the hospitals can treat the reach and insured.

____________________

Its not delusional. McCain wants to stay in Iraq for an extended time. Even now in the "calm" of Iraq are there not soldiers giving the ultimate sacrifice. How many kids who have asthma and other treatable conditions will not receive the health care they need? What do you think will happen to some of them? Did I say you "want" kids to die? No, I just am arguing if you want better access to health care like Hillary and Obama and to end the war in Iraq, four years a long time. Your delusional if you think that 4 years of innaction will not yield the same negative consequences that both candidates want to prevent.

____________________

ca-indp:

Let me enlighten those Obamamorons caring about what rest of the world thinks about USA.
Rest of the world doesn't give a f--k who the president of USA is!! Those who follow Bin Laden's religion stiil going to try to kill u even if God forbid, Obama is the president.
These morons believe in the Myth that the world is suddenly going to start loving us.
This BS is spread by MS and liberal BS sites.

____________________

jradMIT:

Uri, do you really think McCain will do more than Obama on this? Honestly, have you seen his plan, just increase the deduction like that would make the dramatic impact that is needed. At least Obama mentions health care, McCain acts like it is the least of his priorities. Its like if you have a broken leg, McCain is telling you to take vitamins. Yeah that will help, but you have a crisis that needs more direct action and fundamental change.

____________________

Stillow:

@jradMIT

Wow.....you need some help.

____________________

zotz:

Obama can still pull it off. It's not panic time. Let the PUMAs do their emotional thing. Obama should focus on the economy. He should repeat it like a mantra, economic message first, last, always. Romney has a net worth of over $200 million. McCain and Romney, two millionaire fat cats that don't give a crap about jobs or the middle class.

Romney has been involved in jobs outsourcing. Tax cuts for the rich is their plan to help the middle class. Turn health care over to big business. That's their plan. Health care costs are one of the biggest causes of bankruptcy for middle class Americans.

WHY AREN'T WE TALKING ABOUT THIS!!!?

Because of the silly, stupid soap opera between Barack and Hillary. I say stop the name calling and hatred. Their is too much at stake.

____________________

atreides:

That's the problem. Obama can't seem to articulate that his tax plan is better for 90% of American's than McCain's. He can't call McCain on the carpet about Bush's $4 trillion spending spree including $1 trillion for Iraq. He should be telling Americans that the devaluation of their currency is what has caused part of the gasoline price increase and that McCain has no plans to change any of it. And in debate, he should challenge McCain to show how his policies are any different than what Bush would do.

____________________

ca-indp:

Usual Dumbo-crats BS. Want to look up how rich some of the Dems are, start with Kerrey, Kennedy ...
Just when u think Obamabots can't get any more stupider, they do. And they epect voters to be equally stupid.

____________________

Stillow:

@zotz

you libs are so full of hate that it clouds your common sense reasoning ability. Tax the rich, right.....do you want to guess what the unemployment rate is in Europe or do you want me to just tell you?
Tax, tax, tax, tax...do you guys have nothign else to do other than take peoples money and spend it for them? I assume you are employed by a poor person....cus evil rich guys like Romney and McCain hate people and jobs right?

You guys on the left are full of yourselves and your holier than thou nonsense you spew everyday.

____________________

zotz:

ca-indp-
Is the reason that want to throw "mud" because you know you can't win debating the issues?
Where you get all that "mud" anyway? No, don't tell me. I already know.

____________________

sjt22:

@ Stillow: If you're gonna spend, you have to tax. Where do you think all the money for stupid wars comes from? It doesn't grow on trees, though Republicans seem to think it does. Its all been put on the credit card by Bush and Co, and will have to be paid off eventually, with interest.

____________________

sjt22:

Regarding the polls, most of this is just mental masturbation with no significance. Oh, McCain is up slightly among registered voters in a tracking poll! Its all over! Oh wait, in 9 of 10 other polls its Obama that's up, not to mention that the Electoral Math favors him. Wait till the conventions are over, wait till the campaign, then we'll may be have some real answers.

____________________

ca-indp:

Zotz:
What is there to debate when u guys throw usual leftist c--p? Like Rep candidates are all rich and Dems are all from hardworking middle class families and somehow care for them.
This is pure non-sense. You expect voters to fall for extinct class-warfare BS?
You can have put on blinders, that's why can't figure out how your Messiah is falling in polls.

____________________

Stillow:

@sjt22

I assume you are employed by a poor person? Since the left hate wealthy people.
Or are you employed by a corporation, which the left also hates?
Tax the rich, tax them into oblivion so you can pay for your entitelemtns and hand outs. Free abortion clinics on all corners. Don't be responsible and have kids when your ready, make them and kill them and your neighbor can pay for it.
Receive a welfare check, its on us. No, no need to work for it or come do community service, you just sit there and enjoy life, we'll take care of everything.
you want higher taxes? Then be prepared for double digit unemployment like most of your European countries.

____________________

Uri:

@jradMIT: I honestly believe that Obama does not give a damn about healthcare. He only picked this topic because it was strategically valuable.

The media tried to ridicule it, but the debate about universal coverage or not exposed it. Obama believes in market forces. He is a hardcore capitalist in his views, which figures with his Chicago school of economics buddies. He just needs to sell himself to his crowd.

I'll paraphrase Bill Clinton: Between the candidate that promises everything I believe in but doesn't mean a word and the one with whom I agree on half the things, I'd pick the latter (if I could vote, that is, unfortunately).

In fact, I would argue that in many ways Obama is worse than McCain. This country is coming out of eight years of rule by a theocratic president. It does not need a president who wants faith based initiatives and all that stuff. McCain may be a conservative, but I think he is much more secular than Obama, and I like that.

____________________

ca-indp:

Stillow, Uri:
Well said, I think voters are waking up to the fact that Obama in an opportunist and fraud like any other power hungry politician.

____________________

zotz:

McCain wants my tax money to fight wars and give big no-bid contracts to Blackwater and Halliburton. Is spending the money on health, education, rebuilding roads, levees here in America so terrible an idea. Why do you call that hate? The rich weren't suffering so much in the 90s. That is the tax level where Obama wants to take the country.

It is the Republicans that are waging class warfare. They are stripping the middle class of the wealth they used to have, the good jobs they used to have, the health care they used to have and giving back non-union jobs at half the salary with reduced or non-existant health care and worse pensions.

American CEOs make over 300 times what the average worker makes. In Germany the CEOs make about 20 times the averave worker. In Japan it is even less! Do you think American products are that much better than Japanese products. If so, tell that to Toyota. If greed were an Olympic sport, the US would win the gold medal every time. I don't hate rich people, I just don't worship them. There is more to success than being a multi-billionare.

____________________

John:

Actually, while the EU nations do have a somewhat higher unemployment rate than the US, (roughly 7.3% for the EU area to the US 5.7%, depending on exactly what measure of unemployment used) only two EU countries have double figure unemployment, Spain and Slovakia, and they are skirting around 10, (some measures have them just below 10).
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/pls/portal/docs/PAGE/PGP_PRD_CAT_PREREL/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2008/PGE_CAT_PREREL_YEAR_2008_MONTH_04/3-30042008-EN-BP.PDF

____________________

RS:

For folks who are more inclined to some reading, I suggest David Leonhardt's piece in the NYT, particularly this page:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/24/magazine/24Obamanomics-t.html?pagewanted=5&_r=1&em

Leonhardt: As per the Tax Policy Center, McCain's plan would cut taxes for 80% of the population - those making $118k/year or less - by an average of $200. Obama's plan would cut taxes by $900 on average.
[As Philip Barnett writes in the Arizona Republic, that savings will likely be spent, improving the pocketbooks of the upper-income earners. Win/win for all.]

It's true that Obama's plan would increase taxes on the rich - but not as much as taxes were under Clinton, when you factor in the rise in their pretax inflation-adjusted income. In fact, much of the tax hike would just be allowing Bush's temporary tax-cuts to expire.

Republicans always say that cutting taxes stimulates the economy. Allowing consumers to keep more money - $900 vs $200 - should increase spending, and improve stockholder incomes... As the AZ Republic opinion states, win/win.

____________________

faithhopelove:

Some people are surprised that national polls are as close as they are. One possible reason is that McCain is performing better in some deep red states than Bush did in 2004.

In the Deep South (LA, MS, AL, GA, SC), one recent poll found McCain ahead of Obama by an average of 25 points. See: http://www.thestate.com/local/story/498085.html

Bush beat Kerry by 25% or more in only one of these states--AL (26%). In LA, Bush won by 15%; in MS, by 20%; in GA, by 17%; and in SC, by 17%.

In addition to this improved performance in the Deep South, McCain is also out-performing Bush in two other southern states (according to Rasmussen), AR (by 4%) and TN (by 11%).

While McCain will take gains in these 7 states, they do not help him win new electoral votes--they only help him keep the national numbers close. If the national McCain-Obama numbers are about the same as the national Bush-Kerry numbers were, and if McCain is performing better than Bush in the states named, then McCain is not performing as well as Bush (on average) in the other 43 states--which include all of the states most likely to flip.

____________________

KipTin:

That sure seems convoluted reasoning to explain McCain's closeness in the national polls. Especially, since these national polls are "random" samples.

____________________

RS: You are still misrepresenting what I wrote.

I wrote, quite simply, "When the post mortem of this election cycle is written, Obama's ill-conceived, ill-fated 3am text message will be seen as the pivotal moment it all started sliding downhill. Pure hubris."

In other words, I was suggesting that if you picture a post-election day retrospective timeline, several factors will be seen as having converged this week to change the momentum in the race, and that this turning point (or "tipping point") could be aptly symbolized by the text message. "Pure hubris" was my own shorthand reference to Senator Obama's apparent disregard of these factors. Time will tell whether I'm right or wrong.

It was Gallup's shorthand mention of the 3am text message that prompted my thought. That is all. You mistakenly inferred the rest.

I value my ability to "parse," or to use words carefully. Its a skill you might wish to refresh.

____________________

faithhopelove:

KipTin:

I don't understand the point of your post at 5:07 in response to mine re: fundraising. My point was to provide info that may give a hint as to which states have the most invested Obama supporters, who in turn are very likely to follow through and actually cast a vote for him in November. Your point about Obama's fundraising being for both the pre-convention cycle and the post-convention cycle seems irrelevant.

Per that subject, Obama and the DNC started August with the same amount of money as McCain and the RNC. McCain is required to spend his money before his convention. After his convention, he will be limited to a total of 84 million dollars until election day. The RNC can spend its money at any time.

Obama may spend all of his money by the end of this month, or he may save some for the stretch run. In addition, he will continue to raise funds. If he continues to raise about 50 million dollars a month (he has raised just over this amount in each of the last two months), then he will have about 150 million dollars to spend up to election day (August total + September total + October total). The DNC can spend its money at any time.

____________________

sjt22:

@ Stillow

You're a joke, a full blown caricature. I have a job and pay taxes, just like you. I don't hate wealthy people or corporations. What I do hate is when my government spends and spends and spends without having any funds to pay for it. It happened under Reagan, and its happened under W. All this supposed "fiscal conservatism" is a load of crap. You want your crazy wars and massive spending? Then you gotta pay the bills.

____________________

faithhopelove:

KipTin:

Why does it matter that the polls are random samples? Are southerners not part of the samples? My point was that southerners appear to be breaking for McCain in larger numbers than they broke for Bush in 2004, thereby helping McCain keep the national numbers close.

____________________

marctx:

Stillow:

Now that I know you're not one of us, but one of them...i don't trust your posts. However, since I'm on your side now it doesn't matter.

The DNC message is ridiculous tonight. Bush, Bush, Bush, Bush. When are they going to learn that Bush is not running???????

So Hillary is arm-twisted into supporting Obama on the DNC Convention Comedy Show??? So what? Obama can not, must not, will not be elected.

Why don't they try to explain why Americans should trust this guy. You want to give fake speeches about change and we should just fall in line. Not today. Not tomorrow. You can suppress our voices in the roll call but you cannot stop our votes in November.

There is only one candidate left qualified to be president. John McCain.

____________________

zotz:

"When are they going to learn that Bush is not running???????"

His policies are running. McCain = Bush's sidekick... best line of the night!

____________________

KipTin:

Well... faithhopelove... your "explanation" basically implies that the south is therefore being "oversampled" in a "national" random poll.

____________________

faithhopelove:

Given the newest round of SUSA Bush approval ratings (released today), the Dem strategy of arguing that McCain is more of the same makes sense. Here are those numbers again:

MN: 32%
MO: 33%
NM: 32%
OH: 28%
VA: 41%
WI: 36%
IA: 33%

Also, the recent Q poll of CO found 30% Bush approval there. These numbers are more evidence that CO, NM, OH, and IA are top-tier pick-up opportunities for Obama. VA looks far more difficult--which is probably why Obama had Mark Warner speak at the convention tonight.

One other note about the current national polls: during this period in 2004, poll results ranged from a tie to a Bush lead of 11 points.

____________________

faithhopelove:

KipTin:

Over-sampling has nothing to do with my theory. My theory is that McCain may be performing exceptionally well among southerners, which in turn is keeping the national numbers close. If on election night McCain wins a large number of red states by an average margin of 25 points, then the popular vote totals are likely to be close. The electoral vote count is another matter.

____________________

marctx:

God bless America. God bless Hillary Clinton. The next democratic president. I cried my eyes out for the true American democrat. Hillary Clinton is a woman...a woman in class by herself. We love you Hillary!!!! You can't even compare what we have....to what we could have had. Look only to Michelle Obama and the crowds eyes to see where we should be going and who we should be voting for....

____________________

Uri:

I'm sorry Hillary, but you didn't convince me tonight.

You did what you had to do and was forced to do, and you did it magnificently. You showed what it looks like to actually believe in an issue rather than using it to get elected.

Unfortunately, your speech made it even more obvious that Obama is an empty shell. And that the royal couple are simply the Homecoming king and queen.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

Hillary was forced to do nothing. If she wanted to she could have been as cold and lukewarm as possible. I found her speech genuine. "Were you in it for me, or were you in it for the Marine." was the message attacking PUMAs and she did it with gusto.

____________________

marctx:

Any republicans that might twist Hillary's words or use this to bash Hillary be careful. Hillary will take you down in 2012. Hillary is the true American democrat. We'll give you this election but not next time. Great speech. Obamanuts can't ask for anything more. When Obama looses, don't blame us!

____________________

brambster:

I wonder who these PUMA's voted for in the last several elections? Are they just swing voters, or dedicated long-term Democrats?

Also, are the states in play that these PUMA's live in?

____________________

marctx:

brambster: the conversation is not about that anymore. it's about if we will take back the white house in 2012. The DNC already lost this one.

____________________

Uri:

@brambster: According to the polls, the 30% of HRC voters who say they wouldn't vote for Obama are primarily older blue collar women. My guess would be that they voted democrat in the past.

Obama people are making a mistake marginalizing PUMAs and NObamas as Republicans and/or racists.

And by the way, Hillary did not say anything today to attest to Obama's ability to pick up the phone at 3AM. Unless, that is, to send text messages.

____________________

faithhopelove:

brambster:

If the primary results are any indication, then many of them live in Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The first three states are not in play, and the other two are states in which Obama is currently polling well.

Some staunch Hillary supporters who have told pollsters they will not vote for Obama will never come around to him. But if the race is really tied (as some people seem to think), then Obama only needs to win over some of Hillary's support to break the tie. Surely Hillary's speech tonight will win over at least some of these supporters.

Some people here are in effect saying, "I love Hillary so much I won't respect her wishes."

____________________

JWilly48519:

Has anyone released any test info as to the impact of McCain's Hillary ads? It might be that one outcome of the huge amount of positive and negative attention she's received has been to make her, for different but coincident reasons among different subgroups who have soft positives and incipient negatives about Obama, an unusually effective negative opinion swayer specifically about Obama.

If that's the case, it'll be interesting to see (if anybody releases any testing) if her effectiveness has symmetry, i.e. if the positive things she said today about Obama and the negatives she laid out about McCain will bring things back with the same subgroups. It's conceivable that her effectiveness could be asymmetrical among some receptors who aren't predisposed to like and trust her except as a reinforcer of doubts they already had about Obama, and/or who aren't willing to accept having their opinions of *both* candidates trashed, thereby creating a perception of no responsible choice. If that's the case, technical kudos to the Repubs for using her as a pitchwoman first.

____________________

JWilly48519:

Regarding the buyers'-remorse-like sentiments being expressed by various folks in this forum and others tonight, it'd be interesting to see some comparative testing in the next few days among Dems and Indies of Obama vs. McCain and hypothetical Hillary vs. McCain. It's conceivable that one reason for the not-very-apparent post-Biden, during-convention Dem bounce so far is that a significant percentage of it is hidden in a bounce for her.

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

ca-indp,

your ignorance of foreign affairs is appalling. it is people like you that make the rest of the world hate us.

You say, "Let me enlighten those Obamamorons caring about what rest of the world thinks about USA.
Rest of the world doesn't give a f--k who the president of USA is!!"

...but do you even KNOW what you're talking about?? Do you even KNOW anyone NOT from the USA? Have you EVER bothered to talk to anyone not from this country?

You are an absolute moron. A typically insular American. Of COURSE the world cares who is the President. He is essentially the leader of the free world. Get a grip.

You embarrass us all. Take a minute to learn about the citizens of the world that live beyond our heavily protected borders. You might actually learn something about the other 96% of the world (yes, that's right, Americans make up only 4% of the world's population). Your ignorance ruins this country. It's shameful.


____________________

zotz:

The whackjobs, of course, will never be convinced. But, those that really are Democrats will find it lonely being outcasts from their party forced to play the fool for Republicans who outwardly show them sympathy but are sniggering at them behind their backs. Republicans don't respect Clinton however much they are using her. In their eyes she will always be the B****!

____________________

Mike_in_CA:

@JWilly,

I think you may be on to something with the "Hillary" bounce. I also think that the ads may backfire. I've got several Hillary-supporting friends who are offended by the fact that McCain would use him in his ads.

One friend: "How dare he! He knows that he's completely twisted her words!" And this actually changed this friend's mind to vote for Obama. Interesting thoughts..

____________________

faithhopelove:

One thing lost in all the Hillary hype tonight was Obama's strategic move of watching her speech from a house party in Montana. (Montana's governor also spoke at the convention tonight.) Obama will continue campaigning in Montana tomorrow morning. This state is in play, a second-tier pick-up opportunity for Obama. He has made five visits to the state, and has also been advertising there. McCain has simply ignored the state. Part of politics is showing up--as the primary season proved.

If Obama wins IA (7 EVs) and CO (9 EVs), then MT (3 EVs) could put him over the top (assuming he holds the Kerry states).

____________________

Uri:

@faithhopelove: Looking at a state level without breaking down into demographics makes no sense.

Obama is only polling well in these states because he has gotten a much greater than usual participation rates from AAs. My guess is that the AAs are underpolled even now, and that they offset the NObamas.

Besides, VA is not blue collar, it's either rural-republican or yuppie DC suburbs. OH and PA are, but PA is traditionally democrat, it hasn't gone red since 1988.

____________________

faithhopelove:

One interesting comment about polling tonight from Chuck Todd. According to his numbers, Obama currently has about 8 out of 10 Dems and is in a close race with McCain; if Obama gets to 9 out of 10 Dems (says Todd), then he will stretch his lead over McCain by about 4 points.

____________________

Uri:

Of course, we still have the fake roll call coming up. If the media gets over it's communal orgasm of unity and cover this soviet trick, today's unity may be undone.

____________________

Uri:

@Mike_in_CA: Since I am not from the US and have spent my share of time in Europe, I think I can summarize things this way:

American Liberals want the world to like us.

Under Bush, we developed this idea that the world supposedly hates us.

In practice, most governments and people do support us (though they think Bush is an idiot).

It's just the vocal liberal in other countries who lost their own elections that bitch about it. After all, France and Germany now have conservative governments.

They're visible because they often join demonstrations by the big muslim populations in those countries that usually demonstrate against the US anyway.

____________________

brambster:

The reason why I asked my question about PUMAs is because it is amazing how many of them show up on certain blog sites. They can in some cases outnumber other groups by more than 10 to 1. I also noted how after the Limbaugh push for Republicans to cross over, the volume of Hillary supporters on message boards rose dramatically despite the fact that Obama already had a statistical lock on the nomination.

There are of course totally fake PUMAs, real PUMAs, and swing PUMAs.

Real PUMAs are people that voted for Clinton, Gore and Kerry. They aren't ticket-splitting old dog Democrats that had a very strong chance of voting for McCain in the first place. Every candidate has some sort of cross-over appeal, so you can't make too much of that or the anecdotal evidence of their existence.

Real PUMAs were watching Hillary tonight. Real PUMAs won't vote for McCain under any circumstance because it would be destructive to their goals. It's very clear that the Supreme Court will lose at least Stevens in the next 4 years, and there's a host of legislative issues at hand, and an economy in trouble. I'm sure to a small few, 4 years of McCain is the best way to Hillary, but that won't even show up in the polls.

I don't doubt that there was a short-term negative reaction to the Biden pick due to semi-PUMAs. We clearly saw this when Obama locked up the nomination and the Hillary supporters stopped their games of polling for McCain against Obama. Obama's 10 point jump was not enthusiasm, it was Hillary supporters supporting the Democratic candidate. They will very likely start polling high again for Obama after tonight, but that won't start to show up until Thursday's polls at the earliest, and the full effect won't be seen until next week.

So for all of the PUMA noise you hear, most of it is from likely Republican voters in the first place. Polls have already shown how much effect Limbaugh had on the open primaries, and the game players haven't stopped.

And for the real PUMAs out there, I doubt that you really matter since people that actually care about Hillary's issues certainly are not better off with McCain, and overwhelmingly common sense will win out.

____________________

illinoisindie:

OPED:
What I find completely amazing is that while the PUMAS supposedly exist for the democrats, where are the Republican PUMAS (conservative christians) who wisely would stay at home rather than betray their ideology or just go along with the program and vote for Mccain. Its a sad commentary on the democratic party (which under no circumstances should lose this election) are willing to betray their principles and vote on something other than the issues.
Most of the Anti-Obama chatter never seems to be about the issues but rather a sometimes incredulous amount of disinformation. Some of you need to read about the rise and Fall of the Roman Empire....unfortunately we are on the same path. Empowering the middle east and enslaving ourselves to the far east...

NO WAY
NO HOW
NO MCCAIN!!!

Ill vote freedom, liberty and justice for all any day

____________________

brambster:

@Uri

So-called conservative governments in France and Germany would be off the liberal scale in this country. Conservatives in Canada are even much more liberal than the Democrats in government.

Left or right of center is of course relative to where that center lies.

I'm not sure what you history is exactly, but the world loved us under Clinton, and overwhelmingly hate us under Bush. Under Kennedy, kids in Lebanon used to call the milk that we gave them "Kennedy milk" and it created a lot of goodwill. Now many in Lebanon would love to see us dead. Why? Because we now ship more bombs than food. We saved people with milk, and we killed their relatives with guns. You don't make friends with guns. It sells well to bully macho cowboy American voters, but it hardly helps anywhere else.

____________________

Hillary20016:

If the PUMAS don't come on board, there won't be

a Hillary2012 nor will there be a Hillary2016

for they will be the reason why the DEMS lost in

08 and Clinton will be the one to blame.

____________________

saywhat90:

let me make this clear the republicans dont care about you former hillary supporters. you are nothing to them but a detterent to the democratic agenda. an agenda that hillary supports all the way. an agenda that will be obliterated if mccain wins. 4 years is plenty of time to get rid of "liberal" judges,start a new war or two, and basically make the poor a permanent feature for american life. do you think his experience will represent you in november. you are no more than cannon fodder for them. you will outlive your usefulness if he wins the presidency. so have fun with that.

____________________

Tybo:

"zotz:
"When are they going to learn that Bush is not running???????"

>His policies are running

yep, obama's support of the bankruptcy "reform", his support of war financing and against dealines (until the primary race), his FISA vote
Bidens work to lessen bank responsbility, his vote on bankruptcy "reform", his gung-ho Iraq attack.
Obama has less executive expereince that Bush.Obama NEVER called the committee he headed to meet.

O'bush it is!

____________________

bmcavan:

The state polls seem to be going in Obama's favor but the national polls are tightening. Who are Gallup and Rasmussen calling? Oklahoma and Texas? I'm confused...

____________________

marctx:

Obama's 15 point bounce begins tomorrow but today we have another good sign for McCain:

McCain 47 Obama 46

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

____________________

bmcavan:

those daily tracking polls seem iffy to me...they seem to skew almost always...regardless of who you're rooting for...but it is still data and you can't deny data...

____________________

KipTin:

Well, I think it is Hillary who will get the bounce. Her speech was EXCELLENT. She just set the bar higher for the Biden and Obama speeches.

Statistically, the Rasmussen and Gallup Daily Tracking Polls do not represent "skewed" results... because they combine 3 days worth of polling which equals a large sample size.

Additionally, the candidates are still in a statistical tie: "The candidates have been within two points of each other on every day but two for the past month."

I know it hurts Obamanation to see McCain inch ahead, but the polling has been consistent.

____________________

KipTin:

And my favorite Tybo.... Is that Obama is the ONE who voted for Bush's energy policy (Bush/Cheney Energy bill 2005) whereas both McCain and Hillary voted AGAINST it.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

Did anyone watch the PUMA/NOBAMA on Larry King Live. Talk about making politics a fickle girlfriend. I heard more words associated with dating like courted, asking, ect. than for a typical voter :p

____________________

zotz:

TYBO-
You just have a list of talking points- you don't really know anything about these issues... DO YOU?

First, Obama voted AGAINST the 2005 BAPCPA law that hurt middle class families. McCain voted fot it. Barack Obama spoke out against provisions in the 2005 BAPCPA that unfairly weigh on certain segments of the population, and proposed changes to bankruptcy law that would seek to level the playing field for individuals in these classes.
Specifically, he proposed providing special provisions for military families and seniors facing bankruptcy. Military families would gain the advantage of a "fast-track bankruptcy practice" under these proposals, with easier paperwork and documentation and a greater bankruptcy exemption for their homes. Similarly, seniors would receive a larger homestead exemption.

In 2002, Biden admitted that his vote for the war was a mistake. He was a voice of reason before the vote when he was trying to limit Bush's powers.
Biden and two Republican senators on the foreign relations committee - Richard Lugar and Chuck Hagel - were pushing an alternative that would narrow the president's authority. Under their proposal, Bush would be able to attack Iraq only for the purpose of destroying Iraq's WMDs and only after seeking UN approval. If the United Nations said no, Bush would have to come back to Congress and demonstrate that the Iraqi weapons threat was so "grave" that only military action could eliminate it. The Senate Republicans, with Bush's backing, defeated the proposal.

____________________

KipTin:

Tonight it is Biden and President Clinton. Here is some Rasmussen polling data that hints at what kind of reception Clinton will get:

Rasmussen states "Despite Biden’s presence, Bill Clinton will be the feature story on Wednesday night and he is currently viewed favorably by 84% of Democrats. That’s two points higher than Obama’s total."

"In spite of the anger generated in the primaries, 75% of black voters still think of the ex-president at least somewhat favorably, and half (51%) view him in a Very Favorable light."

Although Obamanation wanted to dismiss the influence of the Clintons in the Democratic Party, it just ain't goin' happen. That is the difference between years of working for the national Dem party and Americans vs. a new flashy guy entering the scene. Obama better have a hell of a good speech on Thursday night and he better deliver it with emotion/passion. Otherwise, he will appear diminished after the Clinton performances.

P.S. Mark Warner's "keynote" address was a big disappointment in terms of viewing him as a future presidential candidate.

____________________

zotz:

OK, I have to admit a mistake. The first sentence of my previous post should say,

"In 2005, Biden admitted that his vote for the war was a mistake." Sorry about that.

____________________

Stillow:

@KipTin

Warner was quite boring...he lacked energy and passion. I was surprised at his lack of energy i nthe speech.

____________________

KipTin:

Hmmm...zotz... Here is an Obama problem: Biden voted FOR that bankruptcy bill and AGAINST the special provisions for military families and seniors.

____________________

faithhopelove:

According to Charles Franklin, Rasmussen's "house effects" are more favorable to McCain than any other pollster. (Perhaps there's a reason McCain's ads are plastered all over Rasmussen's web-site.) See:
/blogs/how_pollsters_affect_poll_resu.html

Despite this advantage, today's Rasmussen poll has the two candidates tied w/o leaners. McCain is up 1 with leaners, meaning he has regained the lead he had on August 9. It may be too early to learn anything by pushing undecideds into leaners, given how much time they have to tune-in more closely and make up their minds.

Interestingly, Rasmussen's tracker has yet to show McCain with any kind of lead w/o leaners this entire election cycle. Note also, McCain appears to have had an exceptionally strong polling day on Monday, results from which became part of the 3-day average on Tuesday. These results will roll off the average on Friday (at which time reaction to the Hillary speech and the Biden speech will also become apparent). Possible reasons for this strong day include the fact that it was the first day of school for many people around the country, a very busy day on which parents with young children and college students might have been unwilling to respond to an automated poll, causing them to be under-sampled.

When asked about the tracking polls yesterday, the Obama camp implied that their own polling showed them doing better than the trackers.

Finally, some historical context: Rasmussen's tracker had Bush consistently ahead during this stretch in 2004 by as much as 3 points. McCain appears to be behind his friend's pace. See: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2004/week_by_week_numbers

____________________

jradMIT:

McCain in good conscience couldn't support those tax cuts, but now they are the centerpoint of his economic plan. Despite Bush's low approval numbers overall he is still very popular with the base. You remember the primary, all of the serious candidates were lock in step with Bush on the war and on the 2001 tax cuts. Bush was president for 8 years meaning he was the king of the GOP for that time and his fingerprints are all over that platform. To think that McCain is not boxed in to the majority of those policies and positions is a little naive.

____________________

atreides:

Is there anybody trying to figure out the possible affect of the Obama ground game on the key battleground states. Can voter registration make the difference in Va, OH, and possibly NC and maybe even FL. 20K voters were denied in FL which would have swung the election in 2000. I keep hearing pundits say that Va and NC will be red regardless of what Obama does or the money he spends in those states. Given that new registrants have to be flying under the radar, is Obama actually under performing his what will be his true numbers.

____________________

marctx:

That's the real question atreides: There is no way to know. Are these infamously famous for not showing up voters going to show up? I feel Obama's ground game is like cheating, considering none of these voters can name a single accomplishment of his. It's the same as a past election here in Texas where it turned out dead people had voted. Same thing, brain-dead people voting for Obama.

I think the ant-Obama sentiment will make up for any gains in this area. Turn-out will be huge.

____________________

sherman:

Gallup Daily tracking:Obama 45, McCain 44.

McCain's one-point lead in that poll lasted one day.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109873/Gallup-Daily-Race-Still-Close-Obama-45-McCain-44.aspx

____________________

Joseph RW:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but all indications are that Clinton didn't want the VP nod. So why hold Obama's not nominating her against him? This site should be fun to read post election. One side or the other is going to be committing seppuku as they won't be able to live in a world where the other candidate or their "non-candidate" isn't elected.

____________________



Post a comment




Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.

MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR