Nevada 10/2, 700 LV, 4%
Obama 51, McCain 47
New Hampshire 10/1, 700 LV, 4%
Obama 53, McCain 43
Sen: Shaheen (D) 50, Sununu (R-i) 45
Washington 10/2, 700 LV, 4%
Obama 53, McCain 43
Gov: Gregoire (D-i) 48, Rossi (R) 48
Posted on October 3, 2008 5:11 PM
Paint 'em Blue baby!
Posted on October 3, 2008 5:14 PM
The next state McCain might pull out of could be New Hampshire
Posted on October 3, 2008 5:15 PM
Nice, Nice, and NICE.
Man, Rassmussen used to be such a downer back around the RNC because they polled even lower for Obama than everyone else, but now I look forward to them more than almost anything else because I know that Rasmussen represents a solid baseline. It's hard to get excited about O+10 in a DKos poll, or some local pollster you've never heard of, but with Rasmussen's republican-leaning demographics assumptions (compared to other pollsters), you can be pretty sure Obama is not doing any worse than this, and that's pretty damn awesome.
Posted on October 3, 2008 5:17 PM
We're on a roll in Nevada. McCain just crapsed out!!
Right-leaning Rasmussen finds Obama up 4 points in NV. Rasmussen's NV polling shows a healthy trend for Obama, who came in at 40% in May, 42% in June/July/August, 46% in September, and now 51% in October.
This poll shows that 37% of NV voters have a "very favorable" opinion of Obama, while just 30% have a "very favorable" opinion of McCain. If enthusiasm is any indicator, then likely voters for Obama are more likely than are likely voters for McCain. Rasmussen did not include Libertarian (and former Republican) Bob Barr's name in his horserace question. NV has a Libertarian streak (Ron Paul beat McCain there in the Republican primary), and Barr is likely to take some votes from McCain--especially now that Barr has opposed the bailout. Another option for NV voters who are displeased with the support of both Obama and McCain for the bailout is to vote for "None of These" (on the ballot there).
4 of the last 6 polls, including the most recent 3, have shown Obama ahead in NV (the larger the sample size, the larger the lead). The most recent ARG poll (which had McCain up 2 points) showed movement in Obama's direction. The Suffolk poll of NV (which had McCain up 1 point) had a sample that was 3% ages 18-25 and 27% ages 65+--obviously favoring McCain. Had the poll been weighted according to the 2004 exit poll, it would have shown Obama ahead. See:
Speculation is swirling today that NV is the next state McCain will concede. He has just canceled a visit to Reno. His campaign said yesterday that resources will be redirected from MI to OH, FL, WI, and possibly ME--no mention of NV. Also, he has very little ground game in NV. It appears McCain's strategy is to hold every Bush state except for IA, NM, and NV (which would leave him in an electoral vote tie), and then pickup one blue state--NH or PA or WI or MN or 1 electoral vote from ME--to break the tie.
Obama recently increased his ad spending in NV (as well as in CO, PA, and FL). He visited the state on Tuesday.
Posted on October 3, 2008 5:39 PM
Great news, these polls, but
@faithhopelove: McSame campaigned today in Reno/NV ("town hall"), I watched it on CNN Live video ... but only for 5 seconds :-)
Posted on October 3, 2008 5:45 PM
Care to rant about evil liberal Rasmussen anyone? LOL. We should keep our eyes on Nevada, I'm of the opinion that it could go either way at this point.
Posted on October 3, 2008 5:56 PM
NH and NV both going blue.
McCain campaign Code Blue: in cardiac arrest, needs immediate resuscitation.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:00 PM
McCain is wasting money in NH. As I have said a number of times he is wasting a huge amount of money in NH in relative terms. 1/3 of the NH market is in Massachusetts (ie Boston). That is money McCain is paying into the nations 7th most expensive TV market and getting zero in return. He might as well burn it. Another 10-15% of NH's TV market is in Maine and Vermont (VT McCain $ is not burning as much as nuking money). All thi sto get 4 EV votes?
That's bad judgement, but then again McCain did pick Palin so his judgement.......
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:04 PM
2 NH polls released today have found Obama with a double-digit lead there. This right-leaning Rasmussen poll has Obama up 10 points. Rasmussen's polling of NH shows an upward trend for Obama--43% in August, 47% in September, and 53% in October. 5 NH polls in a row and 7 of the last 8 have shown Obama ahead in the state. As popular as McCain has been in NH over the years, Obama is now viewed more favorably by voters there (according to Rasmussen). Biden is now viewed more favorably than Palin as well.
NH has long been thought to be McCain's best pickup opportunity. Now the state appears to be slipping away from him. His revised strategy seems to be to hold all of the Bush states except for IA, NM, and NV, and then to win one blue state to break the electoral vote tie--NH or PA or WI or MN or 1 EV in ME. NH no longer seems to be a likely pickup for McCain. PA and WI have been trending toward Obama. 1 poll has shown him with a 1-point lead in MN; yet just last week McCain's own pollster did not name MN as a top-tier pickup opportunity for him. See:
Here is why McCain's people started talking about winning 1 electoral vote in ME. If McCain holds all the Bush states but IA, NM, and NV, he needs 1 electoral vote to break the tie; and with NH, PA, WI, and MN slipping away, ME looks like his best bet.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:05 PM
Look at the closeness of the race in Nevada which is still within sampling error:
"McCain is viewed favorably by 54% of the state’s voters, Obama by 53%... Voters in Nevada are fairly evenly divided as to which candidate they trust most when it comes to the economy."
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:07 PM
Hmmm ... RCP paints NH light-blue ... making it Obama/Biden 264 vs McCain/Palin 163 ...
Rasmussen on 9/23 had McCain 49 vs Obama 47, while many other pollsters had Obama ahead by 1 to 3 points ...
The senate race is also going the democratic way, with Shaheen up by 5 points ... that is a drop of 7 points for Sununu ...
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:12 PM
Kind of interesting you can take two states on the opposite side of the country (NH, WA) with the same size LV sample, same margin of error, and one day appart and get the same exact results.
btw, GO SHAHEEN! On our way to 60, baby!
Oh yeah, is Barr on the ballot in Nh?
NV, NH, NC - It does appear to be over. I had said prior to the first convention, we need to wait a week to 10 days following the first debate. That is when 90% of undecides make up their mind, the first 10-15 minutes of the first debate, they zone back out after that. Well they have decided, and I think I just saw the fat lady walk into the green room with a bottle of Evian, and some producer with a clip board running after her yelling 5 minutes! You're on in 5 minutes!!
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:13 PM
I am going to wait for more polls on New Hampshire after the Democratic primary polling debacle.
Was McCain in Reno, or was he in Pueblo, CO? See:
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:15 PM
You're right - Biden nearly cried last night, so this poll might not show nearly a large enough victory margin for the Democratic ticket! ;)
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:16 PM
Maybe you better take time out for a reality check... 1magine.
From Pollster.com charts--
Nevada: Obama +0.3%
North Carolina: McCain +0.5%
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:17 PM
Florida Says Palin Had Strong Debate Performance, But Gives Slight Edge to Biden When Asked if There was ‘Clear Winner’: SurveyUSA interviewed 900 Florida adults, of whom 758 watched the Vice Presidential debate last night between Republican Sarah Palin and Democrat Joe Biden.
Of debate watchers: 35% say Palin was the clear winner. 44% say Biden was the clear winner. 21% say there was no clear winner. No material difference in how Florida men and Florida women saw the debate.
Debate audience was 34% Republican, 36% Democrat, 27% Independent.
Of debate watchers, offsetting gains:
44% say their opinion of Palin went up. 21% say their opinion of Palin went down.
43% say their opinion of Biden went up. 20% say their opinion of Biden went down.
Florida debate watchers say: Palin was more likable. Biden had a better command of the facts. Biden was more ready to assume the office of President, should that become necessary.
56% say that Biden makes the Democratic ticket stronger, 15% say he makes the ticket weaker, 28% say he makes no difference.
48% say that Palin makes the Republican ticket stronger, 38% say she makes the ticket weaker, 15% say she makes no difference.
76% of Republicans and 56% overall think Palin would be a better Vice President than Dick Cheney.
39% of Republicans and 64% overall think Biden would be a better Vice President than Dick Cheney.
SurveyUSA state of Florida research conducted exclusively for WFLA-TV Tampa, WFOR-TV Miami, WFTX-TV Fort Myers and WKRG-TV Pensacola.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:20 PM
I will continue to say this.
His chance at the 1 EV in ME is shockingly dim.
The north country in NH is much like ME 2 (the district McCain would try for). Note the Obama lead from this poll in the north country 56-34 from yesterday.
Obama can send up legions of volunteers from southern ME, MA, VT or NH. If he is playing to win by 1 vote on 10/3 in ME-2 he is a Dead Man Walking.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:23 PM
BRUTAL NEW MCCAIN AD:
This one is gonna leave a mark...
Also pay attention to Minnesota with Obama +2.8% with latest poll from SurveyUSA....
9/30-10/1/08 725 LV McCain 47 Obama 46
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:24 PM
You don't seem to mention CO at all though...that's a bush state that McCain must hold in order to have the slightest chance, given the strategy you mentioned above...
I just don't see any way that he can hold on to all of these critical states given the trend estimates of late...
If Obama holds MN, takes CO or NV/NH...its all over...
I hear the fat lady warming up...
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:28 PM
BoomIdiot, and KipTin.
You guys are so smart and must be involved in the campaign. How could the McCain/Palin folks not have them on your team.
Please, send all resources to Minnesota a state that has NOT gone for repug since 1972. I beg you, send all McCain resources to MN. Please. Use your influence and einstein like intelligence to have the campaign do this. Please.
Nevada: Females Obama +9, Males Obama -2. The 2004 presidential poll in Nevada showed 52% females, 48% males voted. If Obama can hold males close and his lead with females is five or over, he wins NV.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:29 PM
RIGHTON! Rassmussen does not account for Obama Ground game... it is a "floor". As Nevada goes..... so goes the Gambler McShame. He may be moving his chips off the nevada table soon, so he can defend Utah and Oklahoma.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:31 PM
Ok, I'm gona say it. Rasmussen 2 points lower for Obama tomorrow.
These are merely examples of Obama's expanded national lead verified via state margins. Is it really a newflash that a 5-7 point national lead translates into a lead in Nevada, which is now very close to the national partisanship?
I notice that national polls are no longer being dismissed and ridiculed on progressive sites. LOL. Maybe we need Plouffe to emphasize that he doesn't care about the national indications.
Stupid ad. GOP took contribution from Fannie and Freddie as well. and they talk about 2003??? from 2003-2006 GOP controlled WH, Senate and congress.
You are soooooooooooo desparate
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:32 PM
What amuses me is that Obozonauts seem to believe that a resurgent Palin will have NO EFFECT on this race.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:34 PM
On the subject of last night's debate:
Palin actually helped Obama by not falling apart and giving an OK performance.
It is in the best interest of the Obama camp to keep Palin in the race. If she had screwed up last night, she would be forced to step down. Then all the focus would switch from the economy to McCain's new VP pick over the next couple of weeks. And with a good pick of someone with gravitas and experience on the economy, McCain would have introduced a possible game changer in the final weeks of this campaign. McCain lost this opportunity last night.
Excellent!!! And 100% factual. FreddieMac and FannieMae and the push for home loans to people who could not afford them are at the roots of this big mess. Democrats have to take responsibility for their wrong track affordable housing policies.
Note: Ad is actually from National Republican Congressional Committee.
BOOM - no one is really looking to you for forecasts anymore... Your credibility is shot. I'd keep them to yourself.
NH: Females Obama +21, Males Obama -2
2004 exit poll showed 51% males, 49% females voted.
Just like NV, Obama trails with men by only 2, so he needs to win females by only a little more than 2. A double digit advantage with women would obviously close the contest if Obama keeps males relatively close.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:35 PM
Current RCP status has Obama with 264 EV and 8 states as toss-up, of which only two (MO and IN) have McCain ahead.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:36 PM
Uh, Kip its freakin NC. The trend and the last several polls are swinging his way - in OCTOBER - Hellooo? If BO is competing in NC in October and winning in October in North Freakin Carolina - Sydney is done. Sorry. Look I said it after WI in the primaries HRC was done. And I was laughed at mercilessly, except for those who knew how to read the remaining map. And I am looking at the map now and I am telling you its over. This is not like a baseball game, you don't have to play em all to know how things are gonna go. PA, NH, IA, and NM are out of Sydney's reach. That puts BO at 264. That leaves 6 EV out of CO, VA, NV, OH, & NC. HE CURRENTLY LEADS IN ALL OF THEM. CO and VA by large margins and a better GOTV.
But ok, I must be breathing the CT mountain air too deep.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:37 PM
Do your homework... Dana Adini... before cavalierly dismissing the FannieMae/FreddieMac issue.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:38 PM
First off, Rasmussen lowered the democratic party ID to just 4 points, so it's certainly possible the gap between Obama and McCain may shrink a little.
But more importantly, who cares? Unless there's a trend, 1, 2 even three point reversals are all just noise. The 4pt Obama lead in Gallup growing to 7 points just two days later is proof of that.
Predictions are pointless.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:39 PM
Very favorable - very unfavorable
Economy Obama +9
Economy poor 56%
Economy getting worse 83%
If you are pro-Obama, everything here is very good.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:40 PM
Right--McCain's new strategy seems to be to win all of the Bush states (including CO) except for IA, NM, & NV, plus 1 blue state.
We vote for the President, not the vice president.
With the VP debate out of the way, the race will now return to Obama v. McCain.
McCain, NOT Palin, Obama, NOT Biden, are running for President.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:42 PM
Look at the North Carolina chart here on Pollster.com. Obama is NOT winning. It is a dead heat.
75 MILLION people watched the debate last night! They got to see Sarah being the Barracuda.
Only 40 million saw her convention speech and McCain gained 15 points.
You Obozonauts better HOPE LIKE HELL that CNN's bogus polls are right.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:45 PM
Of course Obama is going to win Washington. It is the Governor's race there that is the horse race to watch. Some kind of campaign funding flack going on right now with Rossi.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:46 PM
No wonder the MSM is lobbying so hard to make us not believe our own eyes.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:47 PM
HOLY INTRADE! Something's going on out there. Pretty sure you can't spin this one any more.
Obama 73.9 UP 8.9
McSame 29.4 DOWN 5.0
Look for Obama double digit leads to start showing up late next week, especially after Tuesday's debate. When undecideds pick a side, they move in masses. Everyone wants to feel like they picked the winner, and ladies and gentlemen, that person isn't McSame!
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:50 PM
OOPSIE, LOOK LIKE REZKO IS SINGIN LIKE A BIRD...
Meanwhile, the FBI is having chats with Obama/Rezko cronies.
October is a lovely month. Always... full of things.
Posted by: Moe Lane
Friday, October 3, 2008 at 05:38PM
It makes you wonder whether Rezko really is talking?
FBI investigates Obama's friend
The FBI is investigating a former Illinois state senator who is a poker-playing buddy of Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama.
According to Chicago authorities, the FBI visited the offices in Joliet, Ill., of a Will County auditor to ask questions about Larry Walsh, a longtime friend of Mr. Obama's, and his chief of staff Matt Ryan.
Mr. Walsh, who served in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2005, was endorsed by Mr. Obama in his county executive election bid. With the support of some of Mr. Obama's U.S. Senate volunteers, he easily defeated incumbent Republican Joseph Mikan.
Why am I bringing up Rezko? Senate Bill 2063.
Here we go:
Once upon a time there was a proposed third airport plan in Illinois. It originally starred our old friend Tony:
So, on Sunday, June 25, 2006, at the Chicago Four Seasons Hotel, Rezko showed up by himself. He said he could offer gubernatorial support for ALNAC’s airport plan – if the governor were allowed to make key appointments to ALNAC’s Board.
In essence, Rezko wanted to turn ALNAC into one of those state panels controlled by unaccountable pay-to-play ringleaders like Rezko and Stuart Levine.
When Jackson and ALNAC quickly rejected Rezko’s offer, they didn’t realize it would be their last official meeting with the state on the airport. A few weeks later, Levine and Rezko were charged in a massive federal corruption case.
This plan was later revived as Senate Bill 2063, which was supported in the Illinois Senate by Blagojevich supporter Debbie Halvorson - who is, by the way, running for Congress in IL-11: her opponent is Marty Ozinga, and you can donate to him here - and our friend Mr. Walsh. As State Rep. David Miller (Democrat, by the way) noted:
SB 2063 was suspiciously noteworthy for another reason: transparency. It passed without fanfare or publicity by its sponsor, the Majority Leader of the State Senate. It’s almost unimaginable that legislation effecting one the most contentious issues facing the south suburbs in 30 years managed to “slip through” the Illinois Senate without public notice. (Fortunately, the bill died in the Illinois House.) Lastly, on the same date of its passage in the Illinois Senate, after having learned of his newly gained status (5 appointments to the airport board), Will County Executive and former Senator Larry Walsh was so ecstatic that he celebrated and was arrested later that same evening for driving under the influence according to The Joliet Herald News.
So, does this mean that Walsh is going to get arrested? I don't know, and I'm pretty sure that the Feds want as many people sharing my ignorance as possible. What's happening here is that cages are being rattled, not least of which is Rezko's: even if he isn't cooperating, if enough people think that he is, and make deals themselves, then he sort of has to start cooperating, lest he spend even more time in jail. This is the Illinois Combine, after all: it is a comprehensive (and unfortunately bipartisan) web of favors, kickbacks, and civic corruption that pretty much extends from the Governor of Illinois all the way down to the streets. Worse than Massachusetts, worse than New Jersey; even worse than Louisiana, before Bobby Jindal showed up with the broom. No loyalty, of course; they'll be happy to turn on each other - and they all know each other.
And this is where Barack Obama learned how to be a politician.
Yes, yes: the Master is pure, and would never stoop to such things. Whatever, kids: just remember that this is where he recruited his core staff from, too. In fact... isn't the DNC headquartered in Chicago, now? Hrm. I wonder if they brought in local talent, too...
Rossi/Gregoire rematch will be a side-note fight to watch. I can only hope what happened last time doesn't happen again.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:51 PM
Re: A resurgent Palin. . . .
It astounds me that anyone of reasonable intelligence -- including conservatives -- can even remotely countenance placing SP into the Vice Presidency. While she didn't babble or stammer too much, she never answered the questions either, and I swear I was going to puke if I heard the work "maverick" one more time. She is a talking head, and the only "resurgence" she created last night will be for the handful of True Believers for whom she is a Saviour-Goddess.
Believe it or not, it appears that the American electorate may actually be ready for substance over style.
Today's PA tracker provides another reason to believe that McCain's strategy (Bush states minus IA/NM/NV, plus NH or PA or WI or MN or 1 EV from ME) is a longshot: Obama's up 10 in the Keystone State. See:
"What amuses me is that Obozonauts seem to believe that a resurgent Palin will have NO EFFECT on this race."
Obama is close to finishing McCain off and Palin is no more than a side show. Palin will have no effect. She lost last night even though she didn't drool all over herself, which might seem like a win to you but it wasn't.
Last week Obama and the DNC spent about $14 million on their ad campaign, while McCain and the RNC spent about $5 million. Obama is drowning out McCain. He is out spending him, out thinking him and out working him. Rumor has it that Obama raised close to $85 million dollars in September; he will match that at least in October and he has his field operation already in place. The RNC is just now building a field operation for McCain, while Obama's has been in place for a year. Obama is priming his field op, which will have a force multiplier effect on the ground on November 4th.
McCain is done and about 10 GOP Senate seats and 25 GOP House seats are going down with him.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:01 PM
Once we get one more poll in NH showing Obama with a big lead like this one, it should go light blue.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:03 PM
Re: NC...set the Pollster chart to high sensitivity and you'll see the recent movement toward Obama in the state; NC is only tied when older polls (including a couple outliers) are included.
Here's my analysis of the state of the race in NC:
In the last 6 polls of NC (conducted by 5 different pollsters and all in the field after McCain's Palin/convention bounce had faded), Obama has led in 4 and McCain has led in 1, with 1 tie. Neither candidate has led by more than 3 points. McCain's only lead was in an ARG poll, which ranked 26th among all pollsters during the primary season. See:
Pollsters consistently under-estimated Obama's margin of victory in NC before the primary there. Only 1 pollster got it right--Zogby! ARG under-estimated Obama's MOV by 6 points, Rasmussen by 5 points. PPP, which is based in NC, was off by only 2 points. See:
PPP's most recent NC poll has Obama up 2 points. PPP includes Bob Barr's name in its horserace question, unlike most other pollsters. As a southerner and former Republican who opposed the bailout, Barr is likely to win at least 2-3% of the vote in NC. (Ralph Nader is not on the ballot there.) Barr will hurt McCain, and his presence on the ballot means Obama can win the state with just 48-49% of the vote.
McCain has started advertising in NC, but he has not been visiting the state. Undecideds may feel neglected by him and break for Obama. Part of politics is showing up. (Palin is scheduled to visit the state on Tuesday.)
As for GOTV efforts, Obama's ground game in NC appears superior to McCain's. Obama has 44 field offices in the state; McCain has 18.
NC has emerged as a 1st-tier pickup opportunity for Obama. His internal polling must show the same, as he heads to NC tomorrow, where he will prep for the next debate through Monday, with 1 official campaign event scheduled for Sunday. (McCain returns to AZ today for his debate prep; he is off the campaign trail until the Tuesday debate in TN.) Obama also has more folks in NC personally invested in his candidacy; he leads the money race in NC counties by almost 2 to 1.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:05 PM
RASMUSSEN FROM FOUR YEARS AGO (or close to it):
Obama 51 (45)
McCain 47 (47)
Bush +2 to Obama +4
New Hampshire (9/15/2004)
Obama 53 (51)
McCain 43 (45)
Kerry +6 to Obama +10
Washington (9/10-23, 2004)
Obama 53 (50)
McCain 43 (43)
Kerry +7 to Obama +10
Obama is performing 6 points better than Kerry in Nevada, 4 points better in New Hampshire and 3 points better in Washington.
Boomshak: "What amuses me is that Obozonauts seem to believe that a resurgent Palin will have NO EFFECT on this race." You are so consistently wrong in your predictions that it's funny. I mean really funny.
Thinking folks: I wonder what will happen as more and more people start to see Obama as the clear frontrunner?
Do you know why so many people are watching the debate?
they want to see SNL!!!
I myself was really looking forward to seeing it too.
Unfortunately, due to mediocracy of moderator, we didn't have a chance to see her flat fall face....
So, don't misinterpret the interest of debate for Palin's favor.
People already knew her real face before vp debate...
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:14 PM
Boom, explain to me how Palin's debate performance will effect this race when it's widely considered that Biden was the more effective?...In fact, many are saying Biden gave the best performance of his entire 36-year career...The truth is Palin's recent interviews have left a terrible stain that she can't recover from...I'm telling you this because I don't want you to be too disappointed.
seeing as most people think biden won the debate, the huge numbers didnt help your candidate... keep trying to spin it though. also keep trying to bring up tony rezko... keep trying to bring up fannie may and freddie mack... you know all of the things youve been preying would work for weeks now and hasnt had a positive effect for your guy. keep preying boom... prey harder.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:15 PM
boomy and kiptank,
The trajectories on NC are not favorable to McC.
I dunno what you expect him to do to turn it around, but, unless Palin is a miracle worker, Obama is headed to take NC. Of course, bad news about Biden/Obama could affect this, but I expect little now. We will check in about this after Frontline on October 14. I am thinking McC has more to fear about that program than Obama.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:16 PM
the funniest line for me in last night's debate from Biden (because I have met him, seen him so often, as I lived in Wilmington for 8 years...):
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:18 PM
All the talk of "more people watched Palin debate last night than the convention" so we can expect a McCain bump completely forgets that the bump McCain got was NOT just a Palin bump. It came from the convention, as it does every 4 years. Don't forget, more people watched McCain's speech than Palin's.
Also...I really don't know how you can watch that debate last night and say Sarah was the barracuda. She did a fine job, but not a great one. Not answering the questions, not addressing Biden's emotional response to talking about his family and Biden's implicit comparisons of her to Cheney all hurt her, I think.
The debate last night? Nothing to see here. It's over, and by next Tuesday, no one is going to care. Certainly not independents.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:19 PM
"Last night in Colorado (one of the key swing states we have our eyes on), the Democratic polling group Greenberg Quinlan Rosner brought together 40 undecided women voters to watch the vice-presidential debate...
Overall, the women warmed up to both candidates throughout the evening—both Biden and Palin's favorability ratings rose 9 points from pre- to post-debate. They liked Palin's strength and confidence, and the married women particularly responded to her "folksiness" and "down-to-earth" personality. That personal regard, however, didn't necessarily mean they wanted to see her in the White House. "I'd like to have lunch with Sarah," said one married woman, "but have Joe running my country." Another agreed: "I think Sarah Palin is cute as a button and is good in sound bytes, but she just is not ready." Before the debate, only 10 of the women believed Palin was not ready to be vice-president or president; by the end of the evening more than half of them (21) shared that concern."
That is going to be the net effect of Palin's debate performance. McCain is going to wish that no one watched that debate.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:20 PM
Steve Bosniak invented the Opple
(ps. "bosniak" is the correct term; that was not a mistake by Biden)
Talk about thin hopes. The story has nothing to do with Rezko.
Here's the noise machine at its finest: A wingnut commenter mischaracterizes (Boomshak) a conservative blog (Redstate) which mischaracterizes a conservative newspaper (Washington Times).... a newspaper which has already posted a correction to their original story.
"Editor's note: The original version of this article has been corrected. The office of Larry D. Walsh was not raided."
That's nice wingnuttery there man.
@kiptin and boomshak
McCain was the first one taking $$$ from Fannie Mae.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:21 PM
You know Bosniak is the correct term, right?
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:22 PM
To elaborate: Bosniak is an ethnicity, Bosnian is a nationality. Sort of like how Anglo-Saxon is an ethnicity and English or British is a nationality.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:25 PM
ticketstub i agree,
what's more troublesome for mccain is those 'independents' seem to think biden was the more effective on every major issue during the debate...the michigan pullout, which many saw as a surprise, isn't going to help mccain's image.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:26 PM
I have been an observer on this site for weeks. I have seen you really take alot of shots here. But at least you have the courage to be here...
As for the new JM attack ad, I expect many more of them. Usually in politics, as the days grow short and the margin grows long, candidates begin to pull out all of the stops to win. I expect alot more. This is actually good news for BO because it almost never works as a strategy.
As for Palin, I noticed alot of time speaking to her own podium instead of the camera - Either she was reading alot or else she finds the podium more interesting than everyone else!
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:31 PM
"Editor's note: The original version of this article has been corrected. The office of Larry D. Walsh was not raided."
Here's the noise machine at its finest: A wingnut commenter (Boomshak) mischaracterizes a conservative blog (Redstate) which misrepresents a story in a conservative newspaper (Washington Times).... a newspaper which has already had to post a correction to their poorly-sourced and speculative original story.
That's nice wingnuttery there man. You have a real shot at getting into the University of Idaho's prestigious journalism school.
But for fun. Please tell us how Obama figures into this? He knows a guy who might be under investigation? oooooh.
McCain knows somebody who's being investigated.... her name is Sarah Palin. Both McCain and Palin know somebody on TRIAL. Ted Stevens.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:33 PM
i just want you to answer one question for me honestly. and i want you to think about this and give me a real answer, with no spin or hopes. in all sincerety, i would like to know if you TRULY believe that the debate you watched last night was a strong enough performance by palin, to win this election for mccain. i want to know if you really believe that you witnessed a power house performance last night that will change the entire dynamic of this election. please be honest....
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:34 PM
To add to my earlier posts speculating that McCain is pulling out of NV, here is an article by a political science professor in NV:
He makes 3 points that support my speculation: (1) the cell phone factor is causing McCain's support to be over-estimated and Obama's support to be under-estimated; (2) Democratic registration in NV has gone from "minus 4,000 to plus 76,000" (Kerry lost the state by about 22,000 votes) since 2004; and (3) McCain's ground game is almost invisible in NV, while Obama's ground game is visible and enthusiastic.
Also, there continue to be reports of disarray in the NV GOP. See:
In 2004, NV polls had Bush winning the state by over 6 points; he ended up winning the state by just 3 points.
It appears McCain is close to conceding IA, NM, MI, and NV--which means his margin of error is very slim.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:35 PM
I never thought McCain would drop below 30 in intrade. That's unbelievable.
Boom, go make a ton of money there on your inherent understanding of our anti-new york Right/Center nation.
RCP has Obama at 264, which includes NH and MN. Pollster.com has 250 without NH and MN. NH with Females +21 and Males -2 for Obama argues for NH as blue not a toss-up. MN is a paradox. The most recent SUSA poll had McCain +1. However, ideology in that poll was way off the 2004 exit poll --- it oversampled conservatives and undersampled liberals. Adjusted for 2004 exit poll, Obama would be +6 in MN.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:37 PM
As usual, I am going to post one of my weekly comments. You can go to people.carleton.edu/~schakj to see my predictions.
1. Obama has taken a commanding lead of the Electoral College. According to my calculations, he leads by 313-174-51.
2. McCain seems to be hold OK in about 22 states, but that is not enough to win. One state after another is moving to Obama and I do not think that McCain has the resources to defend all of these states.
3. The nation as a whole is breaking decisively for Obama. My brother's website best illustrates the movement: race-to-270.com. According to my brother, Obama has a 97 percent chance of winning the election. I do not know if I am that confident, but I will say that the McCain campaign is fast approaching Panic Time.
4. The VP debate and presidential debate had limited impacts. If anything, Obama has only strengthened his lead.
5. I am now convinced that the blue/purple states (WI, MI, MN, WA, PA, NH, IA, and NM) are locked-up for Obama. McCain would be best advised to pull his campaign out of, not only MI, but ALL blue/purple states. He must concentrate on holding VA, OH, FL, IN, CO, NV, MO, and NC.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:38 PM
Was Palin's Convention Speech enough for her to rally McCain 15 points in a few days? Now I am assuming the same American people that watched the Convention speech watched the debate and I am also assuming that what motivates them has not completely changed in a few weeks.
So yes, it is possible this could make a big difference.
We'll see. I am predicting Rasmussen 2 points lower for Obama tomorrow. If I am wrong, you can laugh at me, how about that?
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:41 PM
So... I just talked to my neighbor. She's said all summer that she's voting Libertarian. Well, we asked if she watched the debate last night, and she said yes, and for the first time in her life, she is voting Democratic. Gotta wonder how many other people have been swayed to vote for Obama after Palin's script reading.
Apparently a resurgent Palin is already having an effect on the campaign. Obama is now up more than 40 points on InTrade. An increase of about 7 points pre-debate last night.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:43 PM
You still see a statistical tie by Sunday?
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:44 PM
What ever happened to 10,000 Bosniaks, anyway? Didn't they play at one of Clinton's inaugural balls?
On a more serious note, the problems with Fannie and Freddie didn't start in 2003 or 1997. The push to give mortgages to lower income people was a gradual one that started under Nixon. In fact, you could argue that giving home mortgages to lower income people was the whole point of creating Fannie Mae back in 1938. The current credit problems can't all be laid at the feet of the people who gave and took sub-prime mortgages. The fundamental issue is that everybody is too highly leveraged.
If McCain concedes Nevada, then RCP would be Obama 269 (tie presumably goes to Obama). So if McCain does concede Nevada, that would mean the campaign believes either MN and/or NH is in play., states both won by Kerry in 2004. McCain would also have to attempt to hold all of the other states which Obama could win like FL, VA, CO etc.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:45 PM
YOU GUYS JUST DON'T GET IT:
Before Palin's Convention Speech, Obama was up by 8 points. He had just given the biggest speech of his lige in front of 100,000 screaming fans. He was unstoppable!
Then Palin spoke. Suddenly it was "Obama who?" and he plummetted in the polls.
Before the VP Debate, Obama was ahead by close to 8. And then 70 million people watched her and 85% said she outperformed their expectations.
Last time she changed the whole race. but this time nothing?
I would be concerned if I were you.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:47 PM
look for NC NH NV IN MO to solidify blue, and look for new states, TX, GA, MS, WV, MT going into toss-up territory
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:50 PM
My only caveat to that is that it will take until Monday for all 3 days of post-debate polling to be in the tracking poll averages (I hadn't considered that before when I made my Sunday prediction).
So yes, statistical tie on Gallup or Rasmussen or both by Monday. Bullsh*t MSM polls don't count.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:51 PM
@Ryan in MO:
Dude you are getting WAY ahead of yourself.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:52 PM
maybe KY, AR, LA as well
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:53 PM
"Before the VP Debate, Obama was ahead by close to 8. And then 70 million people watched her and 85% said she outperformed their expectations.
Last time she changed the whole race. but this time nothing?"
When the expectations for her were so low due to her own previous bad performances in interviews, she would have succeeded in outperforming expectations just by not tripping on stage.
you really think it's that far-fetched?
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:54 PM
@KipTin and Boom
RE: Fannie and Freddie
KipTin said about the McCain ad:
"Excellent!!! And 100% factual. FreddieMac and FannieMae and the push for home loans to people who could not afford them are at the roots of this big mess. Democrats have to take responsibility for their wrong track affordable housing policies."
You're ability to push the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (1999) and the Commodity Futures Modernization (2000) out of even your peripheral tunnel-vision when you talk about this always astounds me and gives me a good chuckle.
People - NONE of this mess would have happened without those two pieces of s**t legislation, for which McCain's campaign co-chair Phil Gramm is responsible for. End of story.
Posted on October 3, 2008 7:59 PM
You don't see that there's a fundamental difference between four weeks ago when all anyone knew about Sarah Palin was that she was a tough, quirky, folksy woman governor and now when everyone has seen her hide from the press and self-destruct in the few interviews she has conceded to? Plus all the scandals that have come out about her and her political career since the convention.
Palin when she spoke at the convention was a blank slate. Voters projected everything they wanted in a VP candidate onto her, and though "wow, she's everything I want PLUS she's quirky, tough, folksy, and female!". But now she's anything but a blank slate and voters have a hard time getting away from "Well, she's quirky, tough, folksy and female... but she seems really unprepared, not too smart, mired in political controversey, and extremely right-wing." I don't think a mediocre debate performance will erase these people's memories and have them magically jump back to supporting the Palin that they imagined they were seeing four weeks ago.
RE: Fannie and Freddie
KipTin said "Excellent!!! And 100% factual. FreddieMac and FannieMae and the push for home loans to people who could not afford them are at the roots of this big mess. Democrats have to take responsibility for their wrong track affordable housing policies."
You're ability to push the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (1999) and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act (2000) out of even your peripheral tunnel vision always astounds me and gives me a good chuckle.
People - NONE of this mess would have happened without those two pieces of s*** legislation, for which McCain's campaign co-chair Phil Gramm is responsible for. End of story.
Was Palin's Convention Speech enough for her to rally McCain 15 points in a few days?
No. RCP average moved less than 10 points in six days following the convention speech. Historically, it has been harder to achieve big swings as the election gets closer.
the reason so many people watched was to see if she would implode. you think the fact that she didnt do so is really as powerful as her convention speech, when nobody knew anything about her and her strong zingers lit up the base. this time all she did was not screw up too bad... and you really think the dynamic is the same? you really must not have a high opinion of the voting population.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:00 PM
Sorry for the double post there!
Just to be clear, the RCP average starting swinging back toward Obama on the seventh day after Palin's convention speech. IOW, it was a standard issue convention bounce, not a game changer.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:03 PM
Item of Interest for Washington State--
Survey USA has a poll on last night's debate. Note: Washington State poll for first Presidential debate had McCain winning.
State of Washington Awards Split-Decision on Palin-Biden Vice Presidential Debate: Immediately following tonight's debate between Republican Sarah Palin and Democrat Joe Biden, SurveyUSA interviewed 1,100 state of Washington adults, of whom 806 watched tonight's debate.
Of debate watchers: 42% say Palin was the clear winner. 39% say Biden was the clear winner. 18% say there was no clear winner.
Of debate watchers:
52% say their opinion of Palin went up. 19% say their opinion of Palin went down.
42% say their opinion of Biden went up. 20% say their opinion of Biden went down.
Washington state debate watchers say: Palin was more likable. Biden had a better command of the facts. Biden was more ready to assume the office of President, should that become necessary.
Debate audience was 26% Republican, 33% Democrat, 34% Independent. Republicans by 6:1 saw Palin as the winner. Democrats by 5:1 saw Biden as the winner. Independents, the most critical and coveted group, broke 5:4 for Palin.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:08 PM
did you read the continuation as well?
Having Slept on it, State of Washington Drifts Slightly to Biden in Scoring the VP Debate …
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:18 PM
if you dont believe there is a huge difference between a convention speech in a vacuum in which rhetoric goes untested, and a debate in which a person did not crash and burn but still was not viewed as the winner. if you cant see the difference between those two things youre a moron. i do not think you are morons, i just think you guys are hanging on to some thin thread of hope, not letting things like facts or numbers get in your way.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:19 PM
First impression on debate is more interesting because there is less influence from MSM "analysts."
I see that Pollster.com still has New Hampshire as tossup (yellow) and Washington State as lean Obama (light blue) even after posting these polls on their trend charts.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:28 PM
Sorry Kip, but the 'whole' seem to view this debate as a Biden victory...I'd like to see another poll out of WA say the same thing...Rasmussen had Palin's 'very unfavaroble' rating in WA at an astonishing 39%....Don't take one poll in a state McCain likely won't win to heart
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:29 PM
According to the latest Rasmussen poll out of WA, Biden is viewed favorably by a 54-39 margin....51% have an unfavorable view of Palin including 39% 'very unfavorable'...My guess is those numbers didn't changed much overnight.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:40 PM
Regarding Nevada, I've done some calling up there to Washoe and Sparks and asked whether anyone has been contacted by Republican supporters or even seen tables or storefront HQ's. They say that the RNC and Nevada GOP is in utter lethargy. They aren't doing anything as they have been completely broken apart by the scandals of the Governor and his wife...and their factions. Meanwhile Obama has a massive GOTV and registration effort going on.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:51 PM
kip, even if this was seen as an overwhelming victory for palin, the greatest win ever for any vice presidential candidate in a debate... she wiped the floor with biden... EVEN THEN it STILL would be very unlikely that it would change the dynamics of this race. because history tells us that people dont vote for vice president, not in big enough numbers to make a difference anyway.
and that was saying she creamed biden... in reallity she didnt even win the debate!
It says something about McCain and Palin that they not only despise the MSM but they are AFRAID of it. Why else after her supposed victory in the debate would they not allow her to be interviewed by reporters or go on the Sunday news programs.
That is not a display of confidence in Palin's ability or popularity. Reagan got just as much hostility from the media and he never hid from it. The truth is that they are so relieved that Palin didn't blow up the campaign (which they were half expecting) that they don't ever want to go through that again.
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:57 PM
Also interesting in that Washington Rassmussen poll is Gregoire's 6 point turnaround in less than a month against Rossi. Now a statistical tie! A REAL statistical tie...not a KipBoom imaginary one!
And this even though Rossi has tried to make people believe that he somehow was endorsed by Obama!
Posted on October 3, 2008 8:59 PM
Re: Fannie and Freddie. The Republicans have very short memories (and bulging pockets from all the money they took from big business). Deregulation, which is at the heart of this economic crisis, has been around for 28 YEARS; as long as the Repubs have been in power. Examples: They deregulated the airline industry, Eastern went under; They deregulated the communications industry-try to find a decent radio station any more-thousands of people put out of work; Phil Gramm deregulates electronic energy trading, your gas prices double because of speculation. Enron. And they have the gall to try to blame the minority party for this mess; they are LIARS.
Posted on October 3, 2008 9:03 PM
correction: Palin was interviewed on FOX but that is not MSM.
Boomshak, is that you buddy? I saw the commercial your were referring to, but it's nothing more than right wing propaganda.
Let me ask you, did you see the jobs report? What do Freddie and Fannie have to do with the rise in unemployment numbers? Have you tried to fill up your car in the last year? What do Freddie and Fannie have to do with the rising cost of gasoline? Have you been watching a TV in the last seven years? Do you know that we're spending 10's of billions of dollars in Iraq? Did you know that none of that money will return to the US? Have you heard of how many people file bankruptcy because the can't afford the rising cost of healthcare. I could go on and on, boom.
I hate to tell you this, but it's over. Game over, dude. You used to come on here day after day mouthing off about the polls, and when they didn't look right then you mouthed off about the intrade numbers. Now, you have to come on here mouthing off about some McCain ad that blames the Democrats.
How about this, Boom, come back here and show us a McCain commercial where he advocates something other than drilling, privatizing something, or giving a tax break. The last guy talked about that stuff and it didn't work to well for us.
BTW, here are the latest intrade numbers:
Posted on October 3, 2008 9:11 PM
RCP Intrade Market
Posted on October 3, 2008 9:16 PM
BooBoo's propaganda piece might leave a mark, but it washes off easily with soap and water.
From the Time article:
"Fannie and Freddie’s political contacts exist deep in the two presidential campaigns.
At least 20 McCain fundraisers have lobbied on behalf of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, netting at least $12.3 million in fees over the past nine years.
Political insiders Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr., picked by McCain to vet his vice presidential nominees, and Jim Johnson, picked by Obama to perform the same function, once worked for the mortgage giants.
And for years, Rick Davis served as president of an advocacy group led by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that defended the two companies against increased regulation."
Go ahead, blame Obama.
Posted on October 3, 2008 9:28 PM
No need to ridicule me... cinnamonape... because I know the basics of statistics.
P.S. It has always been roughly equivalent to a tie in Washington State between Rossi and Gregoire as evidenced by the Aug 19 top two primary in Washington State. (Rossi 46%/Gregoire 48%/Other 5%). The question will be where that "other" vote will go in the general with only two on the ticket.
Hey...I never tried to compare the Washington State SurveyUSA debate poll with the Rasmussen poll. Quit making stuff up by refuting things that I never said nor implied. BTW: Debate watchers may be likely voters, but they are not equivalent.
Posted on October 3, 2008 9:34 PM
I stand corrected. Here's a commercial about McCain raising taxes on the middle class:
Posted on October 3, 2008 10:13 PM
With approximately 760 hours to go before this election, it's getting pretty damn nail-biting for the GOP. McCain is in trouble in places no one ever thought he'd be: Nevada??? McCain is probably the most faithful champion of the gaming industry, and has been for years... almost considered a Senator at-Large for Nevada. For McCain's chief strategists, it's like seeing the advancing nose of a torpedo blocking your periscope view.
Advice to the McCain camp: hammer away with constant campaigning in 4 large states that are on the edge: Florida, Missouri, North Carolina and Virginia.
Advice to Obama: prepare for some outrageous attention-getting accusations and attacks during Debate 2. McCain will take today's NYTimes piece on Obama and Ayer and make it sound like 9/11 v2.0.
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:19 PM
Don't forget about the 1948 election my liberal friends who live and die by these polls. Dewey had a double digit lead on Truman.
Everyone believed Truman was finished except Truman himself. I say "Give 'em hell Sarah".
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:25 PM
The same WA survey says that Biden strengthens/weakens ticket 54/17
Palin strengthens/weakens hers 47/35
They also find that Biden had much clearer command of the issues.
Men were over-represented 53/47; should be the other way around. Men felt she won the debate by 10% but women went for Biden.
I'd like to know the presidential preference before and after this debate to see if it was a game changer with this particular sample. We've only seen scant evidence of this, and it cuts in both directions, one way for Luntz' panel, and the other for CNN's panel and some more informal surveys.
Palin overperforming expectations and being telegenic definitely staunched the bleeding. The campaign was a train wreck and this debate switched the tracks as they were approaching the edge of the electoral cliff.
The one group of voters I really DO worry about are those who supported McCain and moved to Obama because they're scared S---less of Palin, due to her bizarre interviews. They may be reassured enough to come back into the fold.
This poll tells me to expect some bounce for Palin in WA and similar states, and a small National bounce of 1-2 points, but some of it will be temporary as the reality of McCain at the top of the ticket make both Palin and Biden minor players one week from now. If Palin really does start to tackle the mainstream press on shows like Meet the Press and does well I think that will help McCain. If she does another moose in the headlights appearance in such a forum she will undo all the benefits which might have accrued from this debate.
National polls should dip from avg of O+6.5 to around O+4.5 and then back to 5 or so, unless the investment/banking/credit markets start to come off of life support, there's a huge gaffe, scandal, or national security issue. If that happens I see the race status quo ante..Obama up around 2 and a very close finish.
McCain throwing in the towel in MI and Obama cash flow may end up playing bigger roles than we think. Also small unforced errors like his insistence on visiting IA could be the difference in a really close race.
He just canceled in Reno and I'm wondering why? NV has been poised to go Dem based on demographics alone, and he can't afford to lose it unless he's very confident about CO and VA. MN is the only state that's now worrying me (though it shouldn't); if the numbers come back for McCain it will be close there; perhaps not so close in NH though (need a couple more polls), and at least 7-8 points up in PA (Morning call daily tracking is up to +10 now) is going to be absurdly difficult to overcome given a strong ground game, huge registration advantage, and Ed Rendel. MO and IN may start to move back to McCain next week though, along with NC if we see any national drift in that direction. Not so sure VA will follow suit though, and great surrogates there for Obama and vastly superior org. National repubs have never had to field much of a team there and didn't this year....I am sure that's changing as we speak.
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:33 PM
It may be wishful thinking that the highest rated debate vp or presidential since 1992 would result in a swing toward McCain. Everyone that likes Obama thought Biden won but in my office everyone was high fiveing and thought Gov. Palin clobbered Biden. To bad the media doesn't point out the many lies of Biden. I can still hope that the debate helps McCain.
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:38 PM
I am always amused when people who are losing in the polls try to avoid the perception that it is over by bringing up 1948. It should not surprise people that on the presidential level, we have not had polling that "wrong" in sixty years.
There are some possible reasons for the 1948 result. Some people (especially the pollsters of that time) think that the polling organizations stopped polling weeks before the election (thinking that people don't change their minds the 1-2 weeks before an election) and missed a late surge for Truman. Other believe that polling, being in its infancy to some extent at that time, started using telephone polling for that election and poorer people (those more likely to vote Truman) did not own telephones. In other words, their methodology consistently oversampled Republicans.
Whatever the reason for the mistake of the polls in 1948, that experience is not relevant today. Today we have many more polling organizations, using much more suffisticated polling techniques (although the recent explosion of cell phone only users make recreate some of the problems of 1948--but again would mean underpolling Obama's support as it has been consistently demonstrated that those people -- mostly younger -- are more likely to be Obama supporters). The chances of such a polling mistake today for a presidential election with respect to the polls of all dozen or so polling organizations is virtually impossible.
Now this analysis does not mean that something cannot happen to shift public opinion between now and election day. And if that happens, we will see it reflected in the polls.
But if Obama is leading on Nov. 3 in the polls by the margins that he is leading today, Obama WILL be elected president. It would be a virtual lock.
Whenever I hear a politician say, "The only poll that counts is the poll on election day," I know that that politician is about to lose in the polls on election day.
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:43 PM
@ jenn : I know Harry Truman is every Republican's favorite Democrat. To his everlasting credit he integrated the armed forces. He went to bed on the night of the election in 1948 after (according to him) eating a ham sandwich and a glass of milk. Anyone who knew HST knew there probably was a double shot of Uncle Jim in the milk. He knew the polls were wrong and that he had won. The BS Chicago Tribune headline was proven to just that - BS. Harry Truman was a courageous man. A very good president and a decent human being. John McCain is no Harry Truman.
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:46 PM
jenn, i have to wonder what you would be saying if the shoe was on the other foot.
Sarah doesn't have to give 'em hell. She just speaks broken English and they think it's hell.
Could somebody here analyze those 1948 polls?
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:47 PM
See my post above--I break down the 1948 situation.
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:54 PM
It is not "broken" English... It is called English vernacular, which most Americans understand very well.
Why does Obamanation need to continue insulting Palin when Obama is ahead?
Posted on October 3, 2008 11:58 PM
just to add on to basil's comment, a coworker of mine mentioned something that i found fascinating and i had never really thought about. when my coworkers and i were all making fun of palin's "gosh"es and "dont ya know"s he mentioned that obama never would have gotten away with speaking in a way thats stereotypical of the way he looks. had he gone out on the debate floor and said something in "ebonics" people would run so fast that he'd be left with california, new york, and DC as his only electoral votes. just another reason people should be a little insulted by the folksy talk that was clearly prepped to mrs. palin.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:00 AM
I have read about how the 1948 polls were carried out in error. The point is the "know-it-alls" back then thought they had it all figured out like you "pollsters" do today.
You guys spend waaaaay too much time analyzing and reanalyzing this meaningless data. Only 700 participants in one of those polls- give me a break!
Basil- I like broken English. I'm from MISSOURI!!
I think you guys work for CNN and MSNBC.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:07 AM
In Ohio opinion on debate is split. More women liked Biden!!
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:08 AM
jenn, would you care to comment on the point i just made about her broken englihs? kip, please feel free to chyme in as well.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:11 AM
By the way folks : After spending over 8 million $ in Michigan Uncle John has called it quits. Already ? GOPer's- save your contributions to McCain - send it instead to the George W. Bush Library. I hear that they still have several books uncolored.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:13 AM
If you don't like analyzing polls, what are you doing here? Wasting your time making fun of people who like to analyze polls is even more pathetic than the fact that many of us enjoy spending so much time analyzing polls.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:16 AM
Mccain is a moron; he has been aggressively targeting MN with limited funds while he is losing ground in ; PA MI OH FL VA CO - McCain camp- dumb and unpredictable!
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:23 AM
Sarah Palin is the first real person we've had running for high office in years- like since Reagan. She definitely held her own in the debate against someone who's been on the national scene for 36 years.
Could Al Gore answer all of the "pop" quiz questions given to Sarah by the media elite? I highly doubt it. He couldn't identify a bust of George Washington, and he takes credit for inventing the internet!
McCain is the weak link for the Republicans. He should be in the VP spot, and Romney or some other conservative should be at the top.
Sarah should have been introduced in 2012 or later.
I still think she'll still make a great VP, and McCain won't turn this country into the former USSR!
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:26 AM
jenn, you just completely avoided answering my question, you really are a palin supporter....
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:29 AM
for the love of God! this woman claims that Alaska's proximity to Russia gives for foreign policy experience!!!!- now that not the liberal media, that's not gotcha journalism = that is sheer stupidity- u right wing wacko's are so ignorant to the truth- u have your minds already made up!
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:34 AM
The fact that people make a hobby out of analyzing polls is disturbing. Especially when when most of the polls don't tell us anything meaningful.
The candidates should just focus on what is good for the American people and quit looking at all the demographics trying to figure out how to win elections. And then when they get elected, it's about running their own agenda!
Great job Nancy Pelosi and Barney Frank!
Go back to your newsdesks people and just report the news.
thinks her states proximity to Russia gives her foreign policy cred.
would deny abortions even for victims of rape and incest
couldn't give an answer to what magazines she reads
couldn't name a supreme court decision other than Roe v wade(she's running for the Vp of USA
THIS IS PATHETIC CRAP, I CANT BELIEVE WE HAVE SOME PEOPLE IN THIS NATION NOT CATCHING ON TO HOW DUMB THIS DITZ IS!!!
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:38 AM
I think Sarah was just stating an interesting fact. You can see Russia from Alaska. I didn't know that! I don't think she was stating that fact as a qualification for foreign policy experience.
How much foreign policy experience did Bill Clinton have back in 1992 as governor of Arkansas? Not much other than attending school overseas? I think he had to wing his way through the campaign too.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:40 AM
I care about results doggon it!! And Sarah has accomplished much in Alaska.
So Obama makes these wonderful, glorious speeches and likes to vote present. Oh that's right- he has been a community organizer. Gotta get those homeless and dead people signed up to vote!
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:45 AM
I don't know why I try, but I'll address your new comments.
First, Reagan was a famous and wealthy actor--how can he be considered a "real" person? And I don't think we want a "real" person (at least not the way you mean it) in the White House. We want an "exceptional" person--and Sarah Palin has not shown any indication that she is anything other than ordinary (although I will admit she has a certain folksy charisma).
Second, Al Gore NEVER claimed to have invented the internet (only that he was an instumental player on the committee that help fund the development of the internet--which he WAS). That long-told lie is really silly and has "validity" only because the lie has been told so many times.
Third, the media did not give Palin a "pop" quiz. It is not a quiz to ask what newspapers or magazines you read. It is not a quiz to ask for clarification on whether you think it should be illegal for a 15 year old who gets raped by her father to have an abortion. It is not a pop quiz to ask what Supreme Court cases other than Roe v. Wade were incorrectly decided in her opinion (I actually read that she recently spoke out against this term's decision regarding the Exxon Valdeze (sp?) case, which obviously affects Alaska, so she did have a view on that case.)
Palin refused the answer those questions, in my opinion, NOT because she did not have an answer to those questions (she knows what she reads and she knows her position on abortion and as noted above, there appears to be at least on recent case she expressed disagrement with at the time it came out). I strongly suspect that she refused to answer those questions because she had not prepared a scripted answer that had been vetted by her handlers. She would rather not answer a question than give an answer she thinks might get her into trouble. She thinks that whatever newpaper or magazine she lists can be used against her. She thinks that if she talks about her real abortion position people will be turned off. She does not want to talk against a Supreme Court case that might be supported by someone who might otherwise vote for her. She simply refuses to answer any question that she has not practice an answer for.
Also, no one made her speak gibberish when Couric asked her a fairly predictible question about the economic bailout crisis. Palin tried to go off script at that moment for some reason and demonstrated a complete inability to formulate a coherent thought if it is the least bit complicated and has not been rehearsed. She is simply unqualifed to be Pres or VP.
Finally, we agree on one thing--McCain is a drag on the ticket (but then again, any Republican would be a drag on the ticket as this is a Democratic year).
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:47 AM
Bill Clinton, although I am not a big fan of him, was not an ignorant moron like Palin. Jenn, you talk about" quiz like questions media asked her"? Are you kidding me? She was asked to name a supreme court case and she couldnt. Is that quiz like? Any relatively well informed person should know that but she has been too busy advocating "creationism", taking books of the shelves of libraries and witch crafting to have had time to read about supreme court cases. The fact that she is on the ticket speaks volumes about how McSame is ready to sacrifice every thing just to get elected. Country first my ass.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:48 AM
@ Jenn : Answer one question for me : Why will you vote for McCain/Palin?
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:49 AM
conservatives don't care about the facts they only care about what their deranged christian leaders preach to them! that's why idiots like you jenn can look beyond the hype of palin for the really dumb ditz that she is!! i mean some of the stuff that she has said is really dumb!!
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:50 AM
Frances McDormand was using vernacular English in "Fargo" but she was speaking in complete sentences. I liked "Fargo". "Fargo" was a great movie. Sarah Palin is no Frances McDormand.
Was it vernacular that the blithering South carolina beauty queen was using? Palin's answers to Couric are like something a tenth-grader would write on an unfamiliar final exam essay question. Just say some words and hope everything works out. The more words the better, just fill up that blue book. And Couric was throwing nerf balls!
Sarah Palin may be a very nice barracuda/pitbull with lipstick, to borrow some vernacular straight from the predator's mouth, but she is less presidential than even Dubya, the worst president in history.
Re insulting: Palin's been called up into the big leagues and she's hitting the ball off a tee. McCain shouldn't have done that to her (and may not even have wanted to) but he did. That's insulting to the American people and unfair to her.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:55 AM
common sense, jenn doesnt answer questions when she doesnt know the answer... im beginning to think we are actually talking to mrs. palin herself.
I'm pretty sure jenn is a parody troll.
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:56 AM
"Why does Obamanation need to continue insulting Palin when Obama is ahead?"
Why does McCainanation need to continue insulting Obama when McCain is behind?
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:57 AM
To common sense:
I will vote for McCain/Palin because I share most of the viewpoints of the Republican party.
Less government control, less taxes(same tax rate for everyone), pro-life, pro-religion.
I'm the one all you liberals hate. I don't have a gun to cling to but my husband does. But I will cling to my religion- or at least God.
I wasn't going to vote for McCain until Palin was added to the ticket. He's too middle of the road for me. I was going to seek out a third party candidate.
Good luck to you all and have fun with your polls. Hopefully they are wrong this time!
Good, one less idiot here. And the polls are right :)
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:00 AM
"I'm pretty sure jenn is a parody troll."
I don't know. She sounds like every dumb conservative girl I've ever known. My best friend is dating one right now who buys into all of the cute little "Where the weather's cold and the Governor's Hot" cliches that the neocons are trying to shove on the Joe Six Pack and Hockey Mom crowd. Kinda creepy, but I just overlook it. They're almost childlike in their reasons for liking candidates like Palin and Bush. "They're just like me! They're MAVERICKS! I want to have a beer with them! She's pretty! I love her hair! Todd would make a GREAT First Dude!" Fortunately, it seems as though the low info. voters are becoming outnumbered after these last eight years, and that looks to be a huge advantage for Obama.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:05 AM
@ change : Calm down - we are going to win. Mc Cain ? Palin are toast. Barack has charisma to spare. The GOP is the last refuge for racists. Not all Republicans are racist but a darn good portion of them are. The majority of MCCain's Support comes from people who still think black people smell funny.
It is increasingly clear that McCain is giving up on NV. In addition to the many reasons I and others have named in the posts above, there is now news that Obama has begun to out-spend McCain in NV by more than 2 to 1. See:
As has been noted, losing NV means that McCain must win every Bush state other than IA and NM, plus one blue state to break the electoral vote tie. He is targeting NH, PA, WI, MN, and 1 electoral vote in ME. Today's polls indicate his chances of flipping NH or PA are slim. He has no margin for error.
Tomorrow, Obama visits VA, and then heads for NC, where he will prep for Tuesday's debate (he has a campaign event in NC Sunday). Biden campaigns in VA Sunday. Springsteen campaigns for Obama in PA, OH, and MI over the next 3 days. LeBron James also campaigns for Obama in OH. Jay-Z campaigns for Obama in FL Sunday and Monday. Biden, Hillary, and Bill Clinton tour PA the week following.
McCain is in AZ for his debate prep, with no events scheduled before Tuesday's debate. Palin is off the trail this weekend, returning to FL on Monday and Tuesday. She also has an event in NC on Tuesday.
After Tuesday's debate, McCain will have less than 4 weeks to visit ME, NH, PA, WI, and MN repeatedly, hoping to swing 1 of them. Palin will most likely be sent to red states--especially FL, NC, VA, OH, IN, MO, and CO--in an effort to hold them.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:06 AM
"Hopefully they are wrong this time!"
Keep hoping, sweet cheeks. That's all grandpa and the MILF have right now.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:07 AM
Of course the polls are right (not that they might not change by Nov. 4, but for now they reflect this moment in time). It is funny that when McCain was ahead (for that short period post convention), Obama supporters (like me) were scared and expressed concern that he might not come back (but never questioned the accuracy of the polls generally, even if we quibbled about one or two that appeared to be "outliers"). When Obama is ahead, the McCain supporters just make up their own reality where the Palin debate performance is certain to bring the polls back to even by Monday (boomshak) or rely on the old "saw" that those darn polls are just plain wrong--look at 1948 (jenn). It proves once again that Democrats live in a reality-based world (even if we are pessimistic--although recent Pres results give us reason to be) whereas Republicans live in a faith-based world in which whatever they want to be the truth becomes the truth in their minds.
"whereas Republicans live in a faith-based world in which whatever they want to be the truth becomes the truth in their minds."
That's the perfect way to sum them up IMO.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:13 AM
I'm not sure if I really belived the polls when McCain/Palin were ahead for a little while. McCain is not persuasive enough for most voters.
You're overanalyzing these polls because people can/will change their preference on election day.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:19 AM
@ Jenn : Good for you. At Least you have core beliefs. You have shown more guts on this site than anyone. Of course I disagree with you. Let me ask you one question ? - If Obama wins will you salute him as the President of the United States?
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:21 AM
Ofcourse people can change their opinion, but it is unlikely to happen on the election day. Is it possible that you will change your opinion and vote for Obama on election day? Same goes for others.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:24 AM
Of course I will support whoever wins as they are the leader of our country. You have to support him especially since we have many outside forces who would be glad to destroy the United States.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:27 AM
Why do I keep trying (or should I say tryin' now that Palin-speak is the "cool" thing?)?
If you want to understand polling a little better, go to the front page of this web site and read the article "Can McCain Make an October Comeback?" It will show you that 30 days out is pretty reliable. Yes, about 5% of people (and about 20% of soft "leaners") do change their minds, but these changes largely offset (and there is no reason to think it would not be picked up by the late polls close to election day even if they are disproporationately changes for one person).
If you really want to know whether the polls are meaningful--do some research. If you do that research and look at the evidence objectively, you will see that the polls at this level (i.e., Pres. election polls) are fairly reliable--they do a pretty good job of predicting the election--and 30 days out is usually a pretty good prediction (but not guarantee) of who will win. The fact that you had to dig back 60 years for even a somewhat plausible counter-example (that I showed above is not really a relevant counter-example) really proves my point.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:28 AM
"McCain is in AZ for his debate prep, with no events scheduled before Tuesday's debate. Palin is off the trail this weekend, returning to FL on Monday and Tuesday. She also has an event in NC on Tuesday."
He can't take a break to prepare. He's too far behind to be wasting time.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:31 AM
Good point. I think there's a lot of fear that binds fundamentalists so closely to their oversimplified world view. The fear is that, without the comforting story, the world is chaos. It's a mirror of the fundamentalist mindset in other religions and the basis for all manner of intolerance.
In defense of religion, most sects have less rigid adherents as well. I don't consider religion per se to be simplistic.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:39 AM
Just to clarify, by "faith-based" I did mean "religion." I have nothing against religion and there are plenty of religous Democrats. I was talking about "faith-based" in the sense that they view their entire world through the lens of what they want to be true (i.e., they have "faith" in their preconceived notions about how they believe the world is supposed to be must be how the world is) rather than observe the objective evidence around them and fairly analyze that evidence (admitedly still through their own conservative lens--perhaps--but at least acknowledge reality). To some extent, I think this can be true of people on the far left as well. It is just that in this country there are so few people on the far left and so many on the far right that I associate this phenomenon mainly with Republicans.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:52 AM
If by 'what happened last time,' you mean crybaby Rossi shopping for a judge to overturn a duly run election, I agree: I don't want to see that again.
The recount was a credit to the people of WA state, and a model for how FL should have carried out their shameful 2000 episode.
(BTW, Judge Bridges tore Rossi a new one in throwing his case out. It was a great day for The People & due process under the law.)
Posted on October 4, 2008 2:09 AM
On Rossi/Gregoire in the WA governor race, the question is how big a turnout King County sees. In the Aug primary, they only had 34.86% turnout. But Obama wasn't on the ticket that day either.
Turnout in WA state in 2004 was 82.23%. In King County it was 82.98%.
Posted on October 4, 2008 2:21 AM
I really cannot understand how even the most diehard Republican doesn't think Palin is a complete joke. It's like a Raider's fan who deep down knows their team sucks but paints their face each Sunday anyway.
Posted on October 4, 2008 2:39 AM
it is very sad that there is no objective view on here about the debate. it is so hard for anyone on both political sides to admit that there was no hit it out of the park moment in this debate. there was no trouncing by palin of biden.nor was biden a wholly convincing winner.and yes i support obama. but im not going to pretend that someone did well because they support my candidate. lets be honest here palin didnt really do well at answer any question. that i m not going to follow the rules i agree was not a sign of a good thing. biden did nto blow her out the water neither. he look unsure how to deal with her through most of the debate.neither managed to impress me.
Posted on October 4, 2008 3:22 AM
"Observing and analyzing evidence," in the way you suggest, is a daunting undertaking for anybody. Many people don't feel that they (or anyone else) are equipped to construct de novo a functioning worldview out of a mountain of evidence. They have to at least feel that they have a connection to some preexisting structure (however vague) rather than a purely personal construct. I include myself here, having moved from middle of the road protestant to, say, philosophical (as opposed to magical) Taoist--whatever the hell that means. I'm not making this up!Heh, heh.
I think "analysis" sounds a little too scientific, as well, compared to the painful, haphazard way that most people grow out of a received worldview (i.e. lose faith in what they're told) into a different one. And there's no guarantee that jumping ship will get you onto a better one. It's always a leap of faith, in some sense.
But then it's the middle of the night.
Posted on October 4, 2008 5:41 AM
A REALLY TERRIFIC ARTICLE ANYONE SHOULD READ (and what I've been saying for months - c'mon John, GO THERE!):
Posted on October 4, 2008 6:22 AM
THE OBOZONAUT DREAM:
Even though Sarah Palin knocked 15 points off Obama's lead when only 40 million people watched her, this time, she will have NO EFFECT after 70 million people watch her.
If you want to know how worried the Obama campaign is about Sarah, you only need see the 24/7 non-stop job that the MSM is doing trying to convince us that she lost the debate.
This despite winning 2:1 on Drudge and 4:1 on the FoxNews Text Message Poll with over 1 million votes cast (I thought it was just liberals with cell phones?).
Posted on October 4, 2008 6:30 AM
"The GOP is the last refuge for racists.
Can you name one racist policy or comment from the Bush Administration in the past 8 years? Just one please.
Let's see, Colin Powell, Condaleeza Rice... doesn't seem all that racist to me.
The true racists are the Democrats as they constantly play the race card to win votes. Republicans, on the other hand, rarely bring up race at all.
Look up what party lead the charge to free the slaves and lead the charge on the Equal Rights Ammendment. It wasn't Democrats.
Posted on October 4, 2008 6:36 AM
Sarah Palin resurgent?
Obama had a +13 night last night in r2000/dkos poll.
People don't want a hussy for VP, they want a leader. She wasn't a hussy at the convention, she was a hussy last night. It turns women off, and it turns most men off who can get laid with normal woman. Obviously, you can't laid, thus leading to your fascination with Palin.
Posted on October 4, 2008 7:51 AM
...and the Rush Limbaugh Poll had McCain +20.
Posted on October 4, 2008 7:59 AM
Good Morning Boomshak
We are electing a President.
After last weeks promotionals on ABC, FOX and CBS a record 75 million people tuned in to see some more Sarah Palin moments. Not wanting to take any chances, the GOP Veep pick chose not to answer many of the questions and instead concentrated on homilies about life in Alaska and abuse her opponents.
The Obama/Biden ticket is now expected to pick up a further point or two in the polls going into Tuesday's Presidential Debate.
Never happy mornings again for John McCain
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:14 AM
"...and Joe Biden chose to answer the questions with 14 separate and distinct lies. Experts agree that it is far easier to answer the questions when you are just making it up."
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:17 AM
This trooperate thing is a no win for McFailin! The Republicans have just made an emergency appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court to not allow the findings to be released. Obviously they feel the findings will hurt her, and if the Republican Alaska Court blocks this it will seem like more of the Bush Cheney, "more of the same".
Also McCain and the RNC are beginning to get really nasty and it is only going to get worse as desperation sets in. I think Obama should come up with the best ad possible stating how sleezy McCain is, and the history of the sleeze in the RNC and run that ad in every battleground state from now until Nov 4th.
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:19 AM
HELL JUST FROZE OVER!
NYTimes has front page article this morning looking into Obama and William Ayers.
The Verdict? Obama was MUCH closer to Ayers than he has let on.
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:28 AM
Lets say Biden was making it up; Why then did Palin not effectively call him out.
According to you she had multiple opportunities.
The fact is she doen't know much about squat. She simply is overwhelmingly not qualified for VP/President in the hugely complex world we live in.
So you have a very lame Presidential Candidate and an overwhelmingly under qualified running mate.
I know you do agree with me, in the circumstances, the GOP deserve to get buried in the polls.
"Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths"
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:30 AM
"Lets say Biden was making it up..."
Dude, your man stood up there and LIED in front of the whole country and YOU DON'T CARE!
I find that amazing. And I guess his lies weren't as bad as the fact Palin didn't call him out on it?
You liberals are truly incredible to me.
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:35 AM
If McCain grows a brain and starts explaining to the American people that by electing Obama they will be putting the Senate's MOST LIBERAL Senator in the WH, LIBERALS in charge of Congress who will appoing LIBERAL judges, he can still win this.
WHY they haven't campaigned on this is a mystery to me.
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:37 AM
I just read the NY Times article you linked. It only proves that the RNC, McCain and the RNC will say and do anything to get elected.
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:43 AM
Well maybe there was nothing to call Biden out on? Personally, I didn't disagree with him, although I couldn't undertsand what he was saying about his vote authorizing the President in Iraq.
With regards the Ayres thing: like you Boom i am a business owner, have been for many years providing employment directly and indirectly for 1,000s of people throughout the world.
I have fallen victim to right wing political witch hunts completely unconnected to when I challenged the completely illegal, indeed treasonable activities of officials in the US Government in the 1960s.
What happened then is a stain on our national character and what has happened in the lead up and invasion/occupation in Iraq and Gitmo are stains on our national character.
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:46 AM
"Well maybe there was nothing to call Biden out on?"
You're kidding, right:
1. TAX VOTE: Biden said McCain voted “the exact same way” as Obama to increase taxes on Americans earning just $42,000, but McCain DID NOT VOTE THAT WAY.
2. AHMEDINIJAD MEETING: Joe Biden lied when he said that Barack Obama never said that he would sit down unconditionally with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad of Iran. Barack Obama did say specifically, and Joe Biden attacked him for it.
3. OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING: Biden said, “Drill we must.” But Biden has opposed offshore drilling and even compared offshore drilling to “raping” the Outer Continental Shelf.”
4. TROOP FUNDING: Joe Biden lied when he indicated that John McCain and Barack Obama voted the same way against funding the troops in the field. John McCain opposed a bill that included a timeline, that the President of the United States had already said he would veto regardless of it’s passage.
5. OPPOSING CLEAN COAL: Biden says he’s always been for clean coal, but he just told a voter that he is against clean coal and any new coal plants in America and has a record of voting against clean coal and coal in the U.S. Senate.
6. ALERNATIVE ENERGY VOTES: According to FactCheck.org, Biden is exaggerating and overstating John McCain’s record voting for alternative energy when he says he voted against it 23 times.
7. HEALTH INSURANCE: Biden falsely said McCain will raise taxes on people's health insurance coverage -- they get a tax credit to offset any tax hike. Independent fact checkers have confirmed this attack is false
8. OIL TAXES: Biden falsely said Palin supported a windfall profits tax in Alaska -- she reformed the state tax and revenue system, it's not a windfall profits tax.
9. AFGHANISTAN / GEN. MCKIERNAN COMMENTS: Biden said that top military commander in Iraq said the principles of the surge could not be applied to Afghanistan, but the commander of NATO's International Security Assistance Force Gen. David D. McKiernan said that there were principles of the surge strategy, including working with tribes, that could be applied in Afghanistan.
10. REGULATION: Biden falsely said McCain weakened regulation -- he actually called for more regulation on Fannie and Freddie.
11. IRAQ: When Joe Biden lied when he said that John McCain was “dead wrong on Iraq”, because Joe Biden shared the same vote to authorize the war and differed on the surge strategy where they John McCain has been proven right.
12. TAX INCREASES: Biden said Americans earning less than $250,000 wouldn’t see higher taxes, but the Obama-Biden tax plan would raise taxes on individuals making $200,000 or more.
13. BAILOUT: Biden said the economic rescue legislation matches the four principles that Obama laid out, but in reality it doesn’t meet two of the four principles that Obama outlined on Sept. 19, which were that it include an emergency economic stimulus package, and that it be part of “part of a globally coordinated effort with our partners in the G-20.”
14. REAGAN TAX RATES: Biden is wrong in saying that under Obama, Americans won't pay any more in taxes then they did under Reagan.
Posted on October 4, 2008 8:50 AM
Maybe the GOP should have drafted you rather than Palin!
For someone who apparently won the debate are you saying that Palin let him get away with all of the above?
in had to be that moderator Ifill who couldn't get either of the VEEP candidates to answer a straight question.
Rasmussen at it again apparently lobbing 1.5% off party ID difference today!
The last desperate acts!
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:00 AM
Where's the link to your poll?
I guess I must be missing it. You fail. Your party fails. Your arguments fail. Your alternate reality fails.
Wait, I guess you'll have your statistical tie by tomorrow as well in Ras and Gallup. No, you fail again.
Oh, and then there as that +26 with woman from the poll. Oh, it'll take more than winking to fix that.
Bye Boom. I'm off to do some cavassing in a battleground state for the day. Have fun failing!
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:01 AM
Yea they're right Boom.... I think its time for you to step down from the soap box. Nobody is listening to you. Maybe we want a LIBERAL president.
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:04 AM
R2K 52-40. Not your favorite I know, but 52-39 (yesterday) post debate.
Which pollster are you trusting today Rasmussen? Gallup?
No more happy mornings for John McCain
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:07 AM
rasmussen tracking sat oct 4
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:32 AM
Good old Ras changed the party ID by 1.5%
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:42 AM
"The stability of these results suggests that the McCain campaign faces a the very steep challenge in the remaining few weeks of Election 2008."
From his lips to gods ears.
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:45 AM
he has it a dem + 9
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:46 AM
I can't believe that you are still reposting that bogus list that has already been refuted! This is the third time at least and three posters have refuted it. This is what I wrote yesterday about it.
"Ah come on Boom!- Cinnamonape, Trosen, and js already kicked yer butt on that phony list. And when they did it you refused to debate and you ran and hid behind your mommy. Now you think they have gone away so you are trying again to peddle that garbage again.
Well it's NO SALE!
Everybody, check it out on the Battleground tracking thread this morning" (yesterday morning)
When you post the same crap over and over that is called SPAMMING.
Gop and dem voter offset by the same margin. Obama leads among ind. voters 49-41
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:48 AM
MCCAIN PICKS UP 3 POINTS ON RASMUSSEN!
But wait you say, Rasmussen today has McCain only +6 and he was +7 yesterday, that's only 1 point!
Yes, but to get to +6 after being +7 for two days, Obama had to poll only +4 yesterday. Thats a 3 point gain!
I predicted a 2 point gain on Rasmussen yesteday and we got 3!
Here we go, the Palin Effect is in motion!
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:49 AM
The NYT story says the exact opposite of what you would like it to say.
According to the summary on the front page of the online edition:
"A review of records suggests that Barack Obama and Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weathermen, were not close."
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:54 AM
obama is still at 51 which means he still polled 51 last night. u are grasping at straws
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:55 AM
I expect a slightly closer race in the next few days; I think Obama will win the next debate decisively. It's in HIS sweet spot and McCain has no choice but to look for something game-changing. He'll be even more McNasty and agressive. That simply doesn't play well.
The real reason Obama will win, aside from temperment and knowledge, is that the tax policies he proposes are basically those which Clinton proposed, and those put forth, and so poorly explained, by McCain are W's policies, plain and simple. No one wants to keep trying the same thing when it's been shown to fail. Enough people remember that our country did well under Clinton (whether or not you want to give him any credit...I give him some).
On energy McCain has had a hook to nervous voters via the dill,baby, drill mantra. that's lost a bit of its luster, I think, and the Congresssional Dems have managed to coopt it a bit by softening symbolically on drilling, and continuing to include coal (clean coal, whatever that is...oxymoron really)and some nuke in the mix. They have move to the center just enough to diffuse on this I think.
Obama will tell McCain that he'll allow expanded drilling as a sop, plus the politically ingratiating coal and limited nuke, if we get the investment in renewables. On the whole McCain's 45 Nuke reactor plan is insane, with a price tag of 350+ Billion and far fewer stable jobs created than a much smaller investment in renewables plus massive disposal issues still unsolved. America needs to lead in something and we're way behind Europe in renewable technology. We need to figure out what to do with rust belt factories long since shuttered. Can't turn em into Nuke plants, but we can retool for wind, solar, and we can retool auto plants for electric. We need an equally massive effort to change over to non-gasoline cars. Mercedes will completely phase them out by 2015. Where's the automakers' commitment; they are our wards these days anyway, the beneficiaries of Gov't welfare.
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:56 AM
Have a look at the link below. I think you are at stage 3.
Posted on October 4, 2008 9:58 AM
or maybe on the cusp of stage 3 and 4
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:00 AM
McCain can still pull it off. Just like Harry S, he needs to believe in himself and his message.
He shouldn't have pulled out of Michigan. That was waving the white flag. He and Sarah should be everywhere meeting and speaking to people.
Back in 1948, Dewey thought he could sit back and enjoy the victory. Truman kept right on going with his task. He probably changed a lot of minds.
Let's go John!
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:03 AM
This is what Rasmussen said this morning
"For each of the past nine days, Obama has been at 50% or 51% and McCain has been at 44% or 45% (see trends). The stability of these results suggests that the McCain campaign faces a the very steep challenge in the remaining few weeks of Election 2008."
"obama is still at 51 which means he still polled 51 last night. u are grasping at straws"
Just wait and see. Obama had a rough night last night on Rasmussen. Especially considering that a BETTER day for McCain 4 days ago fell off the average.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:04 AM
This is what Rasmussen said this morning
He is talking about the 3 day moving average numbnuts, not the actual daily numbers. Geesh.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:05 AM
BTW Rasmussen 1000 lv. who won the debate
You are s e r i o u s l y comparing 1948 polling analyses to today's? Are you on crack???
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:07 AM
Just watch, tomorrow it will be Obama 49, McCain 46.
Boomshak, you make the neophytes whole number mistake. McCain could of easily went from 44.4 to 44.6.
Not much reason to panic on the Obama side.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:08 AM
obama was 51 in yesterday's tracking and he's 51 today. itmeans he keeps polling at 51. whats so hard to understand.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:09 AM
Do you really think he'd say '...faces the very steep uphill battle...' if McCain had a good night last night, he'd be more guarded. The debate had zero effect. The Palin effect is completely non-existent.
He needs an international incident - i.e. Putin invading Ukraine, Or Israel bombing Iran (not going to happen, Tzipi Livni is NOT a hawk) or an attack on home soil (god forbid). Failing these, he is in trouble.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:12 AM
Wasn't McCain on Truman's staff in 1948
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:13 AM
Explain to me, in a 3-day moving average, Obama doesn't have a bad day yesterday when we got from:
+6 This slightly better day for McCain fell off.
+7 This very strong day for Obama stayed on.
+7 This strong day for Obama stayed on.
+6 Oops, had to be a rough day for the average to go down 1 here.
Anyway, tomorrow Obama 50 or less and McCain 46 or better.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:16 AM
More fuzzy math and spin. Here’s your exact quote from yesterday:
Ok, I'm gonna say it. Rasmussen 2 points lower for Obama tomorrow.
Posted on October 3, 2008 6:31 PM
As I read Rasmussen today, Obama’s number hasn’t moved. Your calculations give us all a little insight into how the Republicans have screwed up the economy so badly.
No time to argue. It’s a beautiful day in North Carolina today and I’m off to knock on doors for Obama and Biden. You guys have no idea what’s happening right under your noses!
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:19 AM
Boomshak you remind of the english trying to invade the french fortress in the Holy Grail. You love being taunted....
"Of course we're french, why else would we speak with this outrageous accent"
Boom a cow just got launched at you
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:20 AM
Your not desperate, your nuts! Wait until Gallup comes out today with Obama at + 9.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:21 AM
And Rasmussen interviews 6% more Democrats than Republicans with an MOE of 3.
In other words, It was a tie. Republicans liked Palin and Democrats liked Biden. Doesn't tell us much about Independents, White Women, etc.
there are more dems than GOP voters in this country
"now go away or I shall taunt you some more"
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:23 AM
Someone please explain to me how Obama now has a 12 point lead in R2000. Please don't tell me he had yet another good day. Could it possibly be that the folksy, memorized lines, winking, blowing kisses, etc... only really got the conservative base "excited" again, and all other voters can see right through it???
Other polls double digit lead for Obama by the end of next week.
Landslide Baby Landslide
boomshak can't deal with math over 1 digit apparently. no wonder he likes palin so much - he has the intellect of a horny 14 year old uneducated idiot.
"More fuzzy math and spin. Here’s your exact quote from yesterday:
Ok, I'm gonna say it. Rasmussen 2 points lower for Obama tomorrow."
And I was right, Obama had to poll only +4 yesterday to got from +7 to +6. That's a drop of 3.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:24 AM
"Someone please explain to me how Obama now has a 12 point lead in R2000."
Lol, R2000 uses a sample of 26% Republicans and it is made to order for the DailyKos moonbats. 'Nuff said.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:25 AM
You're full of it, and everyone knows it. Why do you keep making a fool of yourself? It's a beautiful day here. Get outside and do something productive. You're only making things worse for McCain and Palin with your intellectual dishonesty.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:27 AM
Boomshak: Until you produce internals to back up your speculation, peer review of your thesis would equal FAIL.
I know the next couple of weeks will be difficult, but believe me , we Demos experienced the same thing in 2000 and 2004.
I feel your pain.
Perhaps we can start a support group for the delusional Repubs to help them over this difficult period.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:32 AM
If you look at the Ras trend, the day that you claim was a good McCain day (that just fell off the average) could very well have been a good Obama day given the O+6, O+5, O+6 and O+6 preceeding it.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:34 AM
NO WONDER DEMOCRATS LIKED BIDEN'S PERFORMANCE BETTER:
He spoke at an 8th grade level while Palin spoke at a 10th grade level.
Biden wins the idiot vote hands down!
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:39 AM
People, tomorrow on Rasmussen, Obama 50/49 and McCain 46.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:40 AM
I just saw on mark halperin site that mccain is going to go nuclear on obama in the last weeks of the election. ie ayers and wright will be used. i think this is relly telling that mccain is seeing the election slip thru his hands. i am a republican that is crossing over to vote for obama. go obama.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:44 AM
I'm just making the point that Truman changed a lot of minds regardless of how the polls were conducted back then.
Even if all the polls say Obama is leading now. McCain should not give up on the battleground states.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:45 AM
Thursday Rasmussen, Obama 54 and McSame 42.
I can see the future, thanks to the witchcraft.
bookshak KNOWS that going from +7 to +6 does NOT mean McCain must have done 3 pts better last night. He is LYING because his predictions have not panned out time and again, and he is holding off the time when he has to admit he was wrong.
We don't know exactly what numbers fell off from 4 days ago (which could explain the move as much as the results from last night) and we don't know whether it went from +7.4 to +5.5 (which would support boom to some extent) or from +6.5 to +6.4 (which obviously would be a fairly meaningless change but would look like a whole point change based on rounding).
Actually, boomshak seems to be more stuck at stage 1 (denial), but really I think he is very close in reality to the final state (acceptance) but will never admit it to us because he is a "homer" for McCain.
boomshak really has only 2 goals. The first is to push Democrats' buttons because he gets such a kick out of seeing our reaction (we are easy to manipulate that way, and he just loves the game). The second is to try desparately to paint a picture where McCain still has a chance because once the stink of "loser" is tagged on McCain, he has NO chance to come back because people hate to support someone who has no real chance to win.
Take boomshak with a grain--no not a grain but with a mound--no not a mound but with a ton--of salt.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:46 AM
"Even if all the polls say Obama is leading now. McCain should not give up on the battleground states."
Brilliant idea! I would love to have him waste more money in states where he stands no chance in hell winning, no matter how negative he is about to get!
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:47 AM
On the NYT article about the crossing of paths between Obama and Ayers this very last paragraph sums it up for me. That is all there is between them.
“If Barack Obama says he’s willing to talk to foreign leaders without preconditions,” Mr. Hayden said, “I can imagine he’d be willing to talk to Bill Ayers about schools. But I think that’s about as far as their relationship goes.”
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:56 AM
Obama has it in the bag. I'm just afraid the extreme right will try to assassinate him at this point.
Posted on October 4, 2008 10:58 AM
Posted on October 4, 2008 11:01 AM
@Boomshak and other friends
The polls are remarkedly stable with a trend current to Obama as McCain/Palin continue to shed support.
Look at R2K daily polling numbers yesterday and going back a week.
Look at Rasmussen numbers on a daily basis, it shows virtually the same. Normally he changs his ID weighting on Sunday. He changed it by 1.5% today which is the equivalent of 51%-43% as represented in yesterday's ID weighting. If the previous 2 days were also changed 51%- 42%.
The Hotline number should be interesting today despite its low daily polling number. Gallup could conceivably go to 9%!
No more happy mornings for John McCain.
Posted on October 4, 2008 11:15 AM
My Bad ID WEIGHTING appears not to have changed. Sorry Scott!
Posted on October 4, 2008 11:19 AM
I for one wish that McSame had not pulled out of Michigan. He should continue wasting his money there. BTW, if MCC were such a great candidate, why is he having so much trouble raising enough money to compete with O (especially with all the rich Republicans there are out there; the ones that benefitted from all the deregulation)?
Posted on October 4, 2008 11:46 AM
i thought they would be tied on sunday??
Posted on October 4, 2008 11:50 AM
I agree with you about Michigan--let McCain keep waisting money in states where he is slipping behind (same thing for Pennsylvania where he has not pulled out yet but polls show his support keeps slipping further behind).
To be fair on the fundraising issue--McCain is taking federal funds for the general election and CANNOT raise money for the general election (once his convention ended, he was prohibited from raising any money or spending money raised for the primary). Now the RNC can and has raised money. Actually, they had a pretty good month raising a record $66 million in September.
I am a big Obama supporter, but I do like the facts to be set straight (I try to live in a reality-based world).
Posted on October 4, 2008 11:52 AM
Please send MCC enough money so he can stay in MI, Being a Republican I'm sure you can afford it.
Posted on October 4, 2008 11:54 AM
Zoom: Thank you for the correction. Let me rephrase my question. Why hasn't the RNC been able to raise enough money for MCC to continue campaigning in MI; a state which up until two weeks ago, was polled at a virtual dead heat between the two candidates?
Posted on October 4, 2008 12:06 PM
Favrejet~ McCain can only give McCain-Palin money attached to other candidates. They are severely restricted in how the can use the cash. The can't, for example, do a strictly "McCain" ad. It would have to be something with Michele Bachman...on her district, for example with "The GOP candiadte for President needs YOU to support Bachman for Congress". Each ad has to be specific and be more in the manner of an endorsement. That's a lot weaker. Palin has helped the RNC a lot...but the two Senate and Congressional Committees are practically broke. They've spent almost all their treasuries. So the incumbents are going to be asking for help...often in States McCain doesn't need to campaign in. The RNC, with Palin money (she attended a $40K/person fundraiser just yesterday) will mainly divert that to Congressional races.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:31 PM
"Back in 1948, Dewey thought he could sit back and enjoy the victory. Truman kept right on going with his task. He probably changed a lot of minds."
The issue in 1948 was that the late poll that predicted a Dewey win was based on phoning people up. In 1948 most people, particularly in rural areas and small towns didn't have a private phone. Thus the calls over-sampled well-to-do Republicans and urban voters. It's likely that Truman had a strong base of support out there all along, but they were not being counted.
Posted on October 4, 2008 1:35 PM
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)
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.
Please email us to report offensive comments.
See our comment policy here. Note that we require commenters to share their email address via Typekey. We will never share your email address with anyone without your explicit permission.
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