Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: 2012 Pres (Rasmussen 11/24)


Rasmussen
11/24/09; 800 likely voters, 3.5% margin of error
Mode: Automated phone
(Rasmussen release)

National

2012 President
44% Romney, 44% Obama
45% Obama, 41% Huckabee
46% Obama 43% Palin
42% Obama, 34% Romney, 14% Dobbs
42% Obama, 36% Huckabee, 12% Dobbs
44% Obama, 37% Palin, 12% Dobbs

Favorable / Unfavorable
Barack Obama: 48 / 51 (chart)
Mitt Romney: 49 / 38 (chart)
Mike Huckabee: 58 / 30 (chart)
Sarah Palin: 46 / 49 (chart)
Lou Dobbs: 33 / 42

 

Comments
Farleftandproud:

Lou Dobbs the Spoiler? What is this world coming to. Only Rasmussen could do this one.

____________________

Stillow:

Didn't take long for you libs to do your dialy Rass bashing.

Obama's high number, 46....7 points below his election number. Obama is a much better campaigner than he is president.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Dobbs wont run for prez. He'll go after Menendez's seat in NJ first i bet. I can see him running in 2016.

Interesting to see Romney on parity with Obama. Obama has taken a dive in the last week in both Gallup, PEW and Rasmussen. People are finally waking up.

____________________

Stillow:

Its been a real bad two weeks for him....and things like climategate are going to just make it worse for him in the coming months.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Well being homophobic can get you to win elections, but Dobbs being the angry anti-immigration hawk he is, he would be nothing but a spoiler, not in NJ. It would be hard I think for any TV political pundit with strong opinions of either side, to win a major election.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Three words will raise Obama's approval by 10 points, even in Rasmussen. "Pass Health care Reform". Despite the discrepency in the polls on how Congress and Obama is handling it, a landmark healthcare bill, with or without a Public option will be a huge victory for Obama. We can't let the idiotic senator from SC get his way. His statement about healthcare reform being Obama's "waterloo sunset" was a big motivator for progressives. I can't honestly say Obama has control over what happens in the economy, but keeping our promises will be a huge victory.

____________________

bonncaruso:

Any pollster showing Huckabee's favorables at 58, above Obama, will clearly show us the conservative tilt of the pollster.

____________________

Jason:

If history teaches America anything it teaches polls this early in the game mean nothing.

Face it in 1971 a poll came out showing Ed Muskie defeating President Nixon by 10 points. Then at the beginning of 1984 a poll came out with Gary Hart and Walter Mondale both defeating President Reagan. It is just too early in the game to make anything from these polls. I wish they would not even do them until closer to election time. It just send false signals to both sides.

I feel myself none of these GOP names will even be on the ticket in 2012. America will never elect a mormon president and Palin will never win a general election. My guess will be the GOP will run someone who is not yet even on the national stage.

____________________

Field Marshal:

I'm thinking the same thing Jason. Two names that come to mind are Condi and Judd Gregg.

____________________

Stillow:

Farleftandproud

Ahhh, a trick the left often uses. Dobbs is not anti immigration. Like most of the country, he is anti ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. you goon. There is a HUGE difference between the two. Damn, do you guys ever, I mean EVER update your playbook?

____________________

Louis:

Of course Rasmussen numbers on Obama have been lower than eveybody eles. But I guess it those liberals like the Wall street Journal and Fox who are off not Rasmussen. It is comparing apples to organges to compare the 46% he gets in this poll with the 53 percent in the election because you are dealing with 11%undecided.
Ultimatly it will be the economy that makes or breaks Obama. The overwhelming view of economists including many conservative ones is that the stimulus has helped. That if anything it was too small and the changes in witholding which were added to please the Republicans were a waste.

____________________

Stillow:

Field Marshal:

I really like Condi alot. I would support her in a primary and the general with my vote and my donations. Jindal should also be o nthe radar screen, or someone like Huntsman.

____________________

Jason:

Dr. Condoleezza Rice and Governor Gregg. That is for sure interesting. Gregg was nominated for Secretary of Commerce but withdrew his own name. This does show me he may be planning a run for the White House and did not want to be a part of the Obama cabinet.

I will give it to Obama he is like Lincoln in the way. He wants a team of rivals in his cabinet, in my view he has this.

Dr. Rice or Governor Gregg will be much better than any of the proven losers that are currently polling. Dr. Rice vs. Barack Obama would be interesting.

What about the Democratic side will anyone oppose Barack Obama? I have a feeling Dennis Kucinich will run again to oppose Obama's stance on the Afghan war. Let's face it that will be the thing to come back and bite Obama more than anything, the Afghan war.

____________________

Stillow:

Louis

Rass has been leading the way all year. He was the first to go the ow 50's and every here slammed him, ooops, guess what? Then all of a sudden everyone else was there too. Then he was the first to go into the 40's and everyone here slammed him, oooops, then all of a sudden everyone else started dipping int othe 40's.

It makes perfect sense for a likely voter pollster like Rass to pick up on trends before adults or registered voter pollsters would.

____________________

Jason:

Dr. Condoleezza Rice and Governor Gregg. That is for sure interesting. Gregg was nominated for Secretary of Commerce but withdrew his own name. This does show me he may be planning a run for the White House and did not want to be a part of the Obama cabinet.

I will give it to Obama he is like Lincoln in the way. He wants a team of rivals in his cabinet, in my view he has this.

Dr. Rice or Governor Gregg will be much better than any of the proven losers that are currently polling. Dr. Rice vs. Barack Obama would be interesting.

What about the Democratic side will anyone oppose Barack Obama? I have a feeling Dennis Kucinich will run again to oppose Obama's stance on the Afghan war. Let's face it that will be the thing to come back and bite Obama more than anything, the Afghan war.

____________________

Jason:

Dr. Condoleezza Rice and Governor Gregg. That is for sure interesting. Gregg was nominated for Secretary of Commerce but withdrew his own name. This does show me he may be planning a run for the White House and did not want to be a part of the Obama cabinet.

I will give it to Obama he is like Lincoln in the way. He wants a team of rivals in his cabinet, in my view he has this.

Dr. Rice or Governor Gregg will be much better than any of the proven losers that are currently polling. Dr. Rice vs. Barack Obama would be interesting.

What about the Democratic side will anyone oppose Barack Obama? I have a feeling Dennis Kucinich will run again to oppose Obama's stance on the Afghan war. Let's face it that will be the thing to come back and bite Obama more than anything, the Afghan war.

____________________

Jason:

Jindal will not run in 2012. He is running for governor in 2010. He will finish out his term and focus on 2016. Even though the Republicans are holding out hope to regain the White House in 2012. I believe Jindal will be the one they are prepping for a solid victory in 2016. I believe Obama will easily be reelected in 2012.

____________________

Stillow:

Don't dismiss the above list though, just because you lose primaries doesn't mean anything. It took Reagan 3 times to win the nomination and he became one of our most popular presidents ever.

____________________

Jason:

Reagan was the exception he is not the rule. There are always exceptions to everything. Face the facts none of the GOP names above come even close to being Ronald Reagan!

____________________

CUWriter:

Jason is right when he says this poll is basically meaningless. It's 2009, not 2011, and even if it was 2011, the polls would still be too early to really say if Obama was in trouble. What observers should concentrate on right now is not head to head matchups in 2012 but approval rating. Incumbent presidents never lose if they can keep their heads near 50%.

Right now Obama is slightly below that and that means an election NOW would be a tossup against any generic GOPer. But the election isn't now, it's three years from now. So who cares? Head to heads are only meaningful during the actual campaign and within a few months of the election. Until then you may as well just look at approval ratings when you want to assess how vulnerable an incumbent is and how well he can move his agenda forward. With approval at 48-49% right now, Obama is finding tough sledding even with huge Dem majorities. Ramming through health care, passing a jobs bill, sending more troops to Afghanistan... none of that will help. He's more or less at the mercy of external forces just as Brendan Nyhan said in his piece on the analysis page.

Oh, and for my money, the 2012 GOP nominee will be Gov. Mitch Daniels of Indiana.

____________________

Jason:

CUWriter,

Good to see someone who actually understands how the game works. For Mitch Daniels he is from my home state. He is very popular here he won reelection by about 20 points in 2008 and Obama carried the state. He very well might be the sleeper. He is not a proven loser like the rest of the big names being thrown about. Some people are trying to compare Palin, Romney, or Huckabee to Reagan. Please give me a break if anyone thinks any of them are even close to being a Reagan they need a serious reality check!

____________________

taurus pt145:

Sarah Palin's massive leap up is the most interesting point in this poll. She was basically written off up until last week.

____________________

Stillow:

Its not so much the poll result that matters...its the establishment of high and low watermarks. Watermarks are critical because it shows what one can get and one can lose. Obama is establishing new low watermarks against common GOP opponents. That is the main thing to take away from a poll like this.

That was one of the key indicators for me when I picked Christie to win by 4 in NJ, he had higher watermarks which means possible support for him was simply higher than possible support for Corzine. In this case, these polls are good because they show low watermarks. How low Obama can go against various opponents.

____________________

Wong:

IF anyone believes these numbers, well I do have some swampland in Florida that I'm selling as lake front property.

____________________

Stillow:

I know Wong...its kind of sad that not all pollsters can be left wing liberal freindly pollsters like the nbc's and cbs's of the world.....its a cryin shame!

____________________

RussTC3:

Adjust for Rasmussen's Republican lean (I'm still laughing over Huck's Favorables) and President Obama is basically right where he was after the 2008 election: a +8 to +12 point margin of victory.

Nice.

____________________

CUWriter:

Trying to "recapture" Reagan is a loser idea for the GOP, and I'm as conservative as they come. There's no recapturing Reagan; he was a one of a kind leader who stood firm on conservative principles while understanding the realities of the day. He dealt both with a firm hand and an open palm with the Soviet Union, he cut government as much as he could without jeopardizing defense, he brokered deals with Dem majorities in Congress but managed to get all the credit and he was personally extremely charismatic and powerful.

Republicans will never find a "new Reagan" and they don't need one anyway. As evidenced by the quickly souring public attitude towards Obama, Americans are realizing that they want competence more than anything. Many people, especially fiscal conservatives/social liberals, were taken in by Obama not by his charm but by his coolness. They were attracted to his intellect and figured "hey, I may not like him on X and Y policies, but the guy is sharp and we need that." As it turns out, being book smart and politically savvy in the Chicago model means nothing in D.C.

The people want someone who can lead, who can get things done while not talking in genuinely upsetting terms like "remaking America." This decade has been that started with a crash, was smashed by terrorism, saw a massive asset bubble and another crash. The people want NORMALCY. Why do you think a guy like Bob McDonnell, a borderline extreme social conservative, won by 20 points in Virginia? It wasn't all Deeds being terrible or Dems in general falling out of favor. Obama's approval with those that turned out this year in VA was still the upper 40s. It was because McDonnell constantly talked about the economy and transportation issues while projecting not charisma but simple competence.

That's what the GOP should be campaigning on in 2010 and 2012 (though God help us all if this recession continues through then). Be conservative, yes. But talk about conservative ideas that are accepted by GOPers, independents and moderate Dems. That's what Reagan did, and while there will never be another Reagan, a man with a proven background of competence and steadfastness will be tough to beat in 2012 after a very rough decade for everyone.

That's why my money is on Daniels.

____________________

CUWriter:

RussTC3

Um... Rasmussen had Obama ahead in 2008 and had him ahead consistently by about 5-6 points. His margin was 53-46. Seems pretty accurate. State polling wasn't so hot that time around but Ras also nailed VA and NJ this year, so there's that.

And again, this is a poll of LIKELY VOTERS. There will almost always be a slant towards the GOP with LVs, especially with an environment where basically Dems are depressed, independents are withdrawn from both camps and the GOP base is incensed.. The numbers seem right to me.

Of course, a likely voter today is almost certainly not what a LV will be in 2012. Three years is an eternity in politics.

____________________

Stillow:

There is only one Gipper!

____________________

Field Marshal:

CU,

I think Mitch Damiels would be an excellent choice. But i think he needs to start getting himself some name rec if he wants to run. Palin, Huck and Romney have plenty of it so he will need to start early.

@Wong,

I replied to your post on the other 2012 Pres polling by PPP.

____________________

Field Marshal:

Farleft,

There is an article in the next section about the "expected boost" by analysts if Obama passes health care reform. Basically, it says, don't expect it.

/blogs/false_hopes_on_obama_approval.html

____________________

Dave Dial:

RaZZZZMussen is so absurd. I don't blame right-wingers for holding on to the Republican pollster, but anyone without any bias can look at Rasmussen's 'polling' on Obama's Favorable/Unfavorable and see that Razz is the only polster to give the President a negative number(48-51).

Every other pollster has the President up double digits. Anywhere from 12 points(Fox 54-43,Quinn 50-38) to 16(R2K 55-39), 23(ABC 61-38).

As usual, Rasmussen is cooking his numbers.

____________________

platanoman:

I think polling for 2012 is ridiculous. As for climategate, no one even knows what the hell it is. Only a hack thinks that's news.

____________________

platanoman:

CUWriter: Of course, a likely voter today is almost certainly not what a LV will be in 2012. Three years is an eternity in politics.


Good point. That's why i think these polls are ridiculous. If you would have told me that the Dems were going to have a huge boost in registration in 2005, then I would think it's a miracle.

____________________

CUWriter:

Dave Dial:

Most favorable/unfavorable polls are done with all adults or at least RVs. Which I think makes more sense since you're not asking if you approve of the job the president is doing, much less if you'd vote to re-elect him. You're asking "do you like this guy?" It's a far more pertinent question to ask adults or just voters when it's not an election year for said incumbent or a month or two before an actual midterm election.

But again, don't rip Rasmussen because of its polling methods. Scott himself repeatedly states that all of his polls will most certainly skew a few points to the GOP side because they only poll LVs. That's not cooking the books or even a house effect. That's a difference in methodology.

And if you want to talk about house effects, just look at ABC/WaPo. Consistently way, way above the trend. So don't even start blaming a "conservative hack" for numbers that don't look good. All you have to do is look at the Pollster main page and recognize that Obama is in a new downtrend (he had one in July that ran through August and was flat from late Aug to late Oct) and he's pretty much incapable of turning it around right now without external forces helping because his policies (stimulus, health care) are polling worse than he is.

platanoman:

The poll isn't ridiculous, but it sure as hell isn't a good indicator of what will happen in 2012. It's a snapshot of "right now." And right now if we were in a Parliamentary gov't, the chances of a vote of no confidence and a snap election started by a Blue Dog/GOP coalition would be pretty high right now.

____________________

Dave Dial:

CUWriter:

That's just bs excuses for Rasmussen cooking the books. He knows that if he tilts his polls to the conservative side, conservatives/Republicans and their outlets will shower him with exposure and he will get paid.

Then, when elections roll around he will start tilting his numbers back towards reality, aligning with most other pollsters. He does it every time.

So neither he, nor you, are fooling anyone. Or at least not fooling those who are not already predisposed to want to be fooled.

____________________

Boomshak Don't Step to This:
____________________

IdahoMulato:

CUWriter

I like your analysis but your claims were all not accurate. It's not true Rasmussen nailed the numbers for the Nov 2008 presidential polls. They were very close though. I think they had it at 52 - 47. "The final Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Election 2008 shows Barack Obama with 52% of the vote while John McCain is six points back at 46% ---
Culled from: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/59_expect_obama_to_win
-----
Rasmussen usually massages the numbers until close to the elections. You can check all their polls 1 month to the election date compared to the other polls.

You have to compare it with other polls and make your own decision.

____________________

RaleighNC:

Farleftandproud said:

Three words will raise Obama's approval by 10 points, even in Rasmussen. "Pass Health care Reform".

Errr...that's 4 words. Are you Joe Biden?

____________________

Rasmus Pianowski:

Oh, come on guys. While you're bitching around for pages, you don't see the real problem with this poll. 48/51 would be ABSOLUTELY fine if it was an approval number.

But it's a favorability rating, and Obama's favorability is always 5-10 percent higher than his approval rating.

So this poll IS biased to the right, because it shows an equivalent of an approval rating of about 40%, and Obama isn't at 40... yet.

____________________

Napoleon Complex:

taurus pt145:
Sarah Palin's massive leap up is the most interesting point in this poll. She was basically written off up until last week.

______________________

You need to look at the chart. Rasmussen on 11/13-14/09 had her at 51/43 favorable. She's actually gone from a +8 to a -3 in this poll, which is ridiculous to begin with.

Hate it for you.

____________________

Rasmussen isn't consciously "cooking the books," however it comes out that way due to his methodology at this time of year. Look at the sample size: 800, for a national poll! And, it's his estimate of likely voters and he uses robocalling with landlines only.

That probably equates to +10-15 points more Republicans than Democrats than would show up in a presidential election. I don't know about independents from a screen like that, although independents with cell phones only, a major Obama/Democratic constituency, are definitely left out of this polling.

When it comes down to a month before an election, his national poll will have about 1,300 respondents, he'll use both landlines and mobile phones, and the universe of voters turning out will return to a scenario similar to what happened in 2008, thus changing his sampling universe.

Today, a registered voter poll would show Palin having about a 30% approval, Obama about 54%, Huckabee probably about 54% also, and Romney about 45%.

____________________

taurus pt145:

napo
I wasn't talking about favs.
I was only pointing out the fact Palin is getting ready to pass Obama soon. I would say within the next few weeks, her book tour and interviews are really bringing people around. I don't know if you have had a chance to watch her, she is very impressive.

____________________

Napoleon Complex:

taurus:

What I'm pointing out is that in the same Rasmussen poll, Palin dropped 11 points in the last ten days or so. According to Rasmussen she was probably already ahead of Obama and has now fallen behind--so I'm not sure what your point is. She quit her job, so there’s no other measure than favorable/unfavorable to compare her against Obama.

So, contrary to your assertion, these numbers tell us that her revenge tour against the McCain campaign actually isn't sitting too well with most people.

____________________

djneedle83:

According to this poll favorable don't correlate to voting outcomes. So the Huckster is + 28 but loses to Obama by 5 points. Dumb ass Palin is -3, but only loses to Obama by 3 points. As Chad Ochocinco says "Child Please".

____________________

IdahoMulato:

Whenever her supporters are asked why they support Sarah Palin, many of them sound like her with their incoherence and inanne idiocy. And geeez, talk about inane idiocy. The same lack of logic, facts, and coherence. It's scary. As somebody said somewhere, "these folks vote, procreate, buy guns, and watch Fox News."

____________________

taurus pt145:

nepol, djneedle, Idaho

All three of you guys sound like scared petty little people. Not mention boring.

Get ready for president Palin.

We are gonna have some fun with Climategate.

____________________

IdahoMulato:

"President Palin"? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
This guy is living in a fools paradise.

____________________

Xenobion:

Noone is reporting the climate story, noone really cares lol. The opposite story happened where EPA studies was proving global warming and Bush silenced them. Its a sad story on either side.

____________________

taurus pt145:

Junk science + junk politics = Climategate

I think climategate will put Obama in the 30's all by itself. Anyone who reads the emails can only come to one conclusion, HOAX, period. Libs spin all you want, you're only digging yourselves a bigger hole.

Fox news and everyone other news agency around the world is all over this now, so the MSM will pick it up in a couple of weeks. Get ready this is gonna be good.

____________________

taurus pt145:
____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

"Anyone who reads the emails can only come to one conclusion, HOAX, period."

You already thought it was a hoax, so you use a few emails out of thousands to try and negate hundreds of scholarly articles so you can be against all environmental protection. Scientists acknowledge that there is a significant dispute about THE EXTENT of global warming, and how much human activity has to do with it. But to call it a hoax makes you sound like a conspiracy theorist.

Human activity affects the environment in many ways that are obvious. I support lowering emissions because I want CLEAN AIR. It's simply the right thing to do. Go to industrial towns in Mexico, eastern europe, or some other places to see what happens when businesses are not suffinciently regulated when it comes to the environment.

____________________

IdahoMulato:

Polls to determine who is liberal or moderate or conservative are at best inaccurate unless I see how the questions were asked. There are many people who will claim to be conservative but per the right wing purity test will be considered liberal. Eventhough I consider myself liberal or progressive, I do better on the purity test construct than Stillow. The best way to determine who is liberal, moderate or conservative, is to use something like the Republican "Purity Test" released recently. I'm not saying we should use that test but something like that.
All what I'm saying is that people should not be allowed to say what they are but a checklist, that allows people to check against what their beliefs are and depending on what people select will determine whether they are conservative, liberal or moderate. A question couched in the liberal-moderate-conservative construct will not produce an accurate result at best.

____________________

taurus pt145:

I look forward to President Palin calling for the prosecution of Obama and his climate czar.


____________________

taurus pt145:

Per Polictico today. Tea Party movement is raising more money than Moveon.orgy.

Huge Tea Party events planned for 2010. For the millionth time in my adult life I'm proud of my country.

____________________

taurus pt145:

I hate to post links here but every American should read this from Real Clear Politics.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/24/the_fix_is_in_99280.html

____________________

openid.aol.com/Rahmsputin:

So if the electorate on election day 2012 looks exactly like Rasmussen's year-out predictions for the 2010 electorate, Obama might be in for a tight race.

____________________

openid.aol.com/Rahmsputin:

Anyone who reads the emails can only come to one conclusion, HOAX, period.

Yes, that one graph from a couple of years ago that the one dude was referring to must be viewed skeptically.

The wingnut excitement over this nonstory is just hilarious.

____________________

Napoleon Complex:

taurus:

So, you can't come up with an intelligent argument regarding Palin's crashing poll numbers so you try to change the subject to this "climategate" nonsense?

We all know you're here to push the teabagger agenda, but you'd have more credibility if you came up with something orginal and not recycle the same nonsense that's been circulating for months. We also all know this is how you guys try to get these lies covered in the legitimate media. It may work on your fellow scrotum-tasters, but you'd have to work a lot harder to convince anyone else.

____________________

taurus pt145:

napo

Again, scared, petty, little people.

____________________

taurus pt145:
____________________

taurus pt145:

Think for yourself, read the ink on the page, do not blindly follow any man, or his party. Wake up this hoax effects nearly everyone world wide.

____________________

Aaron_in_TX:

The stupid "climate-gate" story is right wing candy because it fits so nicely into their existing conspiracy theories.

1) That global warming research is manufactured so liberal scientists can force lifestyle changes on people. It's not about the environment, it's about power. Environmental laws are about redistribution of wealth.

2) That academia is controlled by liberals so they stifle dissent. Peer review, statistical analysis, data, etc.. are all frauds because it's all part of a plot to push an agenda.

3) The media, also controlled by liberals, parrots the lie because it also wants to push its agenda and gain more power and shape the world as they see fit.

This is the same kind of thinking that led John Birch Society members to accuse Dwight Eisenhower of being a communist. I swear, the right wing has lost all of its sanity.

____________________

taurus pt145:

Aaron = blind follower

____________________

taurus pt145:

Aaron, good points, I agree with all three.

1) That global warming research is manufactured so liberal scientists can force lifestyle changes on people. It's not about the environment, it's about power. Environmental laws are about redistribution of wealth.

2) That academia is controlled by liberals so they stifle dissent. Peer review, statistical analysis, data, etc.. are all frauds because it's all part of a plot to push an agenda.

3) The media, also controlled by liberals, parrots the lie because it also wants to push its agenda and gain more power and shape the world as they see fit.

____________________

Jake Bryant:

Rasmussen has consistently had R leaning polls since the election. This one is well outside every other poll.

They have the President's favorable 7 points below the average of all other polling, which otherwise has been pretty steady.

They have Romney's favorable rating 11 points higher than it has been in over a year and the highest I can ever remember them being

Huckabee is 16 higher than average and 13 higher than it has been in over a year

Palin is 7 higher than average and the highest its been since the election except for a Fox poll that also provided many of the highs on the other potential candidates.

When you are off by an average of double digits and no less than 7% from the average of all other polling, its an outlier if you're being generous and an example of Rasmussen's bizarre behavior if you are not. They are screening "likely voters" three years out, and their screen has a pretty obvious Republican tilt

____________________

Xenobion:

I've heard everything now, Academia is a fraud. The world is flat, the sun revolves around the Earth. If you believe global warming to be a conspiracy theory I suggest you look to the rest of the world where conservatives have embraced it as fact and get your head out of your dark ages.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

Obama is giving one hell of a speech tonight. He knows he isn't a general or some great warrior. The mission to finish off Al Quada was never accomplished and Obama is still picking up the pieces of past mistakes. Our new troop buildup is going to "disrupt and dismantle" insurgents in Afghanistan and Pakistan plotting acts of terror. This is not a decision I wanted, but he really has a call to join international forces to help solve this problem. He is trying and working hard. This surge in Afghanistan may not work, but it is his chance to take. I am confident weighing decisions responsibly is what could make Obama a success. Impulsive decisions in contrast is what has made many of our conflicts like Vietnam and Iraq failures. Obama rocked in his speech tonight.

____________________

Farleftandproud:

I doubt that Mike Huckabee will drop about 10 points as a credible candidate after giving clemency to a rapist who had a life sentence and ended up killing several cops in Washington State. The GOP Governors, especially in the south are held to be tough on crime and have been frequently critisizing for not staying executions of people who may possibly be innocent. This is outrageous on Huckabee's part, because if I were a governor, I could never give clemency to this monster who shot the cops in Washington. I may be liberal, but trust me I would fight like hell to keep someone like that behind bars as much as possible. Huckabee making a mistake like this is going to lose points with conservatives. Lets not forget the Willy Horton ads in Mass. when Dukakis gave clemency to a guy doing hard time, who got released and killed someone. George H. W. Bush's campaign ran the ad endlessly.

____________________



Post a comment




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

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