Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: Daily Tracking (9/2-4)

Topics: PHome

Diageo/Hotline **
9/2-4/08; 877 LV, 3.3%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews

National
Obama 46, McCain 40


Gallup Daily
9/2-4/08; 2,779 RV, 2%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews

National
Obama 48, McCain 44


Rasmussen Reports
9/2-4/08; 3,000 LV, 2%
Mode: IVR

National
Obama 48, McCain 46


** "The Diageo/Hotline Daily Tracker Poll, conducted by FD, is a new daily tracking poll that is being conducted from September 2, 2008 until Election Day, November 4, 2008. The poll is being conducted via telephone among a random, nationally representative sample of registered voters, age 18 and older. FD is interviewing no fewer than 300 registered voters nationwide each day up to Election Day. Results will be released daily, Monday through Friday."

 

Comments
Snowspinner:

This narrows it, but, crucially, does not seem to be numbers that mean McCain led in yesterday's polling. (Nate at 538 has detailed analysis and crunching of this)

Palin was surely a better night for the GOP than McCain, which suggests that even at the height of McCain's convention bounce, the race is even with a slight advantage for Obama - the pattern that has held for months.

____________________

marctx:

McCain TV Ratings Beat Obama in Preliminary Numbers...

Also,

Thousands show up to McCain-Palin speech today to "See Sarah". Did you see her cool rock and roll hand gestures!!!!

____________________

Flashlight:

Smart People,

How reliable and respectable is this new Diageo Poll? Looks like a smaller sampling than the other two.

Also, are live interview polls more reliable than IVR?

thanks,

Flash

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Maybe she'll be able to hand gesture our economy back to prosperity.

____________________

cmbat:

Question, can someone give me the 2004 R/D/I percents again of the actual final vote?

____________________

boskop:

@kerrchdavis:

"sigh...ok, boskop. McCain certainly knows what war is like firsthand, and if that is your priority, you're voting for the right guy."

gosh, you dont seem to be able to pull the gist out of a post do you?

fyi: his fight talk is a non starter with me though i know why he did it.

i am anti war unless for our immediate protection. obama rattles his sabre louder and more recklessly than does mccain.

you are a foolish follower of the pied piper of the say anything to get elected demagogue. i'll save your thoughtless posts and hold them dear to my heart when obama recklessly repeats the mistakes of his most infamous predecessor.

sadly though it is not something i wish to be found prescient on.

____________________

KipTin:

Watching MSNBC this morning with "Live" and time in the upper left hand corner of the screen and the the ticker running along the bottom of the screen using YESTERDAY'S Gallup Daily Tracking Poll numbers. Yet TODAY'S Gallup Daily Tracking had been available for over 40 minutes. I noticed this because when the Gallup polls are going up for Obama that they "announce" it as part of the daily talk. Wow, how biased can MSNBC get?

____________________

Stillow:

Palin got over 40 million viewers, more than Obama...the GOP's #2 got more than the Dems #1....thats excitement for Palin. If McCain #'s come in higher than Obama....you could see the start of a very bad trend for Obama....afterall he was supposed to be the exciting one right? The left and the media are underestimating Palin....big time....her favorables are then the other three....
We won't know the full affect of bounces til Monday thru Wedsday next week.

____________________

Brutus1_:

Where did you get that lie, stillknowsnothing, the bible?

____________________

boskop:

cnn is like too. i have too often seen the website post late for good mccain polls. like hours and hours late. but they post immediately for obama on the rise.

nothing new there.

is there really anything left that is unbiased? no.

do i think democracy is in big fat trouble? yes.
do i think we are the laughing stock of the world? we deserve to be.

do i think we need to overhaul antiquated documents and systems? yu bet.

do i think we'll survive,

better than ever. the 'shale things up ' riff that both candidates address underscores this. it is not just a play for difference it is a timely cleaning out of the filthy Augean stables.'

muck it out baby.

____________________

Brutus1_:

Funny thing is, Obama's support is stable at 48, even after palin's lie filled speech.

Wait til the media rips her a new one over all her scandals next week.......ROTFL!!

I can't wait for the next few weeks!!

____________________

mirrorball:

@cmbat: The numbers up on CNN.com say 37%R / 37%D / 26%I for 2004.

____________________

FFlyer:

SO THIS IS THE BOUNCE FROM PALIN!!! Bad news for McLame. His speech last night won't raise his numbers at all and her negatives will only increase from here, especially once the GOP shuttles her back to Alaska for the next 2-3 weeks. The Dems are going to hit her hard on why she has to go back home to 'bone up' if she is so ready to be VP, not to mention slamming her on her extreme right wing views.

____________________

Brutus1_:

many tards have -rightly- said that we are the laughing stock of the world. Yeah, and why do you repub clowns think that is?

Ask anyone outside this country and they will give you a one word answer: BUSH.


____________________

boskop:

buruts1..

oh god voice99, cant you even disguise your style? is mark that lame he cant track your nasty habits?

____________________

cmbat:

@mirrorball

Thank you very much.

____________________

Stillow:

@FFlyer

Uhhh, the Palin bounce has barely one day in there...and you already see obama losing ground.....and trust me, the GOP want you guys to hit he rand hit her hard....cus so far its backfiring since her approvals are higher than obama and biden.......please continue to sink your own ship.

40 million viewers...more than Obama.....embarassing for Obama.

____________________

carl29:

Remember what I was talking about Hillary's dreams for 2012 and Sarah Palin: Well it wasn't just me.

Betsy Hart, a rightwinger, was thinking the same thing, Do you really believe that she and I are the only ones?Um..let me think: NO!!!!

"Can’t You Feel Hillary’s Pain?"

"On the one hand, Hillary Clinton could just be a very happy woman about now. Witnessing the blockbuster Sarah Palin speech at the Republican convention Thursday night, she has to feel more than a glimmer of hope that Barack Obama will lose in November, making her the presumptive nominee for the Democrats four years from now starting on election day 2008. (And giving her “I told you so” rights galore.)"

"Her moment of glory and vindication may keep getting delayed, but in her mind it’s all about patience, patience, patience."

"Hillary Clinton she watched what she had to immediately understand was the American people falling in love with Sarah Palin. Did she get a glimpse into the first woman President of the United States? Did she realize she’d seen the future – and it wasn’t Hillary Clinton?"

"'But wait a minute' you can almost hear Hillary Clinton say to all those ungrateful Americans – you people are supposed to want ME, ME! I’ve been waiting for this. I’ve sacrificed for this. I’ve stayed married to Bill because of this! I’m the one. You owe ME!'"

"'Her? Her? She doesn’t play the victim card! She doesn’t talk about glass ceilings and how she’s badly treated because she’s a woman. Are you people crazy? She’s not a woman, she’s pro-life. Pro-life. She likes babies! And guns. And men. And she’s really good-looking! It’s not fair!'"

"Yikes for Hillary. This has got to hurt."

*Betsy Hart is a syndicated columnist

Poor Hillary :-( she was so close when Sarah Palin slammed the door on her nose!!!!

____________________

SwingVote:

What do you guys think of 6.1% unemployment? Shouldn't we be talking about it instead of non-issues?

Bush/Cheney were disaster and McCain/Palin are no different. Same tactics, same divisiveness, same advisers, same speechwriters, same policies same same same.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

Sarah Palin isn't presidential. Its both her appeal and downfall eventually.

____________________

carl29:

@"her approvals are higher than obama and biden"

Well, that depends who are you asking to. According to ABC News survey released today, "More have a favorable than unfavorable view of Palin by 50 percent to 37 percent — a bit less than the 54 percent to 30 percent positive opinion they have of Biden."

So, according to Rasmussen, the republican, evangelical pollster who since months ago has being pushing for Sarah Palin, she is viewed more favorably than Biden. However, according to ABC News, do you remember the debate debacle in PA? Hard to argue that they love Obama, Biden is seen 4% more favorable than Palin. In addition to 7% less favorable than her.

*Since ABC News' survey doesn't mention Obama, there is nothing to argue there.

____________________

Snowspinner:

Brutus1_ - Excellent observation. Palin and Giuliani's red meat attacks on Obama did not move his numbers - they enthused the base. Which is to say, all that happened here were some undecideds who were clearly already leaning McCain are enthused enough to say so to a pollster.

____________________

gregspolitics:

In Gallup, Obama and McCain were tied 45-45 the day the Dem convention began, August 25. By Friday the 29th Obama led 49-41 and by Monday of this week he still had the 49 while McCain had gotten to 43 with a Palin selection bounce. Today, McCain has only gained one point during the GOP convention from 43 to 44 while Obama gained 4 points during the same time of the Dem convention. McCain might get one more point or he may gain nothing more after his speech and today's unemployment report. In Rasmussen, McCain has basically gained more committed supporters (45) at the expense of his leaners, which is the same number today (46) as it was 9/1. Meanwhile, Obama's committed supporters (46)remains where it was last Friday before Palin and the GOP convention, while he has lost 1 point on his leaners to uncommitted in the past week (49-48), which is not surprising given the week of Palin and the convention. It appears that McCain is going to net less bounce than Obama and that part of that bounce is going to have been in the pre-convention selection of Palin and the rest her securing the base Wednesday night. McCain is not going to get what he needed from his convention to reach out to swing voters.

____________________

FFlyer:

Palin was a gimmick pick and that will become clearer and clearer as the days go on. These polls are the high water mark for McLame and its only downhill from here for him and that joke of a VP pick. I can see it now, once she loses the election in Nov she'll head off to 'Dancing With The Stars' or some other reality show with her inbred family and that will be last we hear of her. BWHAAAA!!!!!

____________________

Stillow:

@SwingVote

Ok lets talk unemployment. Europe is into the whole liberalsim is great thing.....go look up there unemployment #'s and then come back to this forum............liberalism doesn't work, it leads to double digit unemployment....large tax burdens and more dependency.

____________________

dc:

Stillow:

What is your source for the ratings? She drew a very impressive audiance, but according to Nielsen, not quite as large as Obama's:

"An audience of 37.2 million people watched Palin on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox News Channel and MSNBC, Nielsen Media Research said Thursday. PBS estimated its audience at 3.9 million, based on a less reliable sample of several big cities. Nielsen does not count the audience for C-SPAN, which also showed the speech.

Last week, Nielsen said 38.4 million people watched Obama speak at a Denver stadium on the six commercial networks, along with BET, TV One, Univision and Telemundo _ four networks that didn't cover Palin's speech. PBS added an estimated 4 million to that total."

ht: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/04/republican-national-conve_n_123986.html

____________________

FFlyer:

And let's not forget at a time when Obama is appearing on O'Reilly over 4 nites the GOP has to sequester their 'brilliant ready to lead' VP pick in Alaska for the next 2 or so weeks to, oh, how did they put it, 'get her up to speed.' LMAO!!!!!!!!!!

____________________

Stillow:

@dc:


Go to drudge he has a link to the info there shwoing palin drew over 40 million...and in addition her speech was aired on less networks...obama was covered by telemundo and bet for example, palin's was not....she got more viewers on less networks..........

____________________

FFlyer:

Of course Palin got a huge audience. NO ONE HAD ANY IDEA WHO SHE WAS!!!! HELLO!!!!

____________________

dc:

Not that the argument is particularly relevant anyways, but his 42.4 M is still more than her 41.1 M, even with her novelty factor. Over a million more. More than the entire state of Alaska more.

____________________

marctx:

Breaking: McCain beats Obama by 500,000...

Sept. 5 (Bloomberg) -- John McCain's campaign expects to leave the Republican National Convention with $200 million in the bank and be able to match the Democrats' spending in the next two months, an aide said.

...McCain's speech is now the most-watched in convention history...

____________________

Snowspinner:

marctx - That is misleading to some extent. By any standard, RNC money is not as good as campaign money.

____________________

carl29:

Breaking News!!!!!

According to Nielsen:

"Nielsen Media Research reported this afternoon that an estimated 38.9 million watched McCain's acceptance speech Thursday night. McCain even drew a bigger audience than his running mate, Sarah Palin, who drew about 37 million for her speech Wednesday night."

"Separately, PBS said that about 2.7 million tuned in for its coverage Thursday night -- down from 3.2 million for Palin and 3.5 million for Obama's acceptance speech."

"That makes McCain's total audience nearly 41 million, compared to about 40 million for Palin and Obama."

Let's see what mainstream Americans thought of McCain's speech. It seems that most people, including Joe S., of Morning Joe, A REPUBLICAN, think that McCain speech didn't hit the nerve as Palin's. But remember, Joe is a Republican. He said that it was perfect to put you to sleep.

However, I don't think that was the main issue. I think that the really disappointing part is that he didn't talk about what he would do to fix the economy, job market, housing market, education, health care, etc. I really think that in the long run McCain fell short of putting "meat" in the bones. But let's wait for the debates, so we can see whether he starts addressing the bread and butter issues like the Democrats are doing.

____________________

NW Patrick:

The Dems are in a very good position. I am no Pollster but here are a few facts I've studied. #1 - Polling results are often based on '04 voting #'s. In VA for instance, 400,000 new DEMS are on the registration rolls. + OBAMA. #2 - Per RealClearPolitics.com the polling average the day before voting in '04 was less than +2% for Bush and he won with a pretty clear margin. Obama is currently up almost 4% with the same methodology. Good sign. #3 - McCain has not receive the bump he would have liked. The fact is in most polls he's hardly broken 45% while Obama is near 50% or sometimes over 50% for the 1st time this election cycle. Palin may h ave fired up the base as they like to claim, but did it fire up the independents? Every indicator says NO so far. #4 - Dems will successfully tie McCain to Bush, rightfully so, the voting record doesn't lie... you say it doesn't work? It already has. Why else is the Senator that everyone knows as the Maverick of 26 years losing in every single major poll? #5 - Obama currently leads in ND, VA, CO, and OH all bush states last go around. Remember, he only needs ONE plus the Kerry states to be elected president of the United States. I see Colorado as his best shot with a young, college educated population, large hispanic community. CO is trouble for McCain. A few recent polls have him up as much as 5% there. MN, MI, PA is a pipe dream for McCain...who drank the Kool-Aide? #6 - In 3 weeks the bi-partisan investigation will be released to the media. Word has it there is some very disconcering evidence of a Palin Scandal. If this is announced, and it shows ANY wrong doing for Palin, it's over. She told 40,000,000 Americans how she turned around the gov. of AK and how she is the reformer, yet the AP had to print a story countering 10+ bold lies she told during the speech, including her EARMARK Maverickness. She herself secured MILLIONS in earmarks for her tiny town. Hipocrite anyone? #7 - The change wind is at Obama's back. His is a brilliant campaigner and nothing will change this.

____________________

marctx:

Obama. Look behind you. You appear to be carrying some dead weight (Biden).

____________________

Robi:

I'm still skeptical. I think the convention bounce will be seen on Monday.

____________________

carl29:

"McCain's speech is now the most-watched in convention history."

As I said, this a double-edged sword, if people were impress with McCain, good for him; however, if people were dissapointed on his speech or the substance of the speech, too bad for him. Time will tell guys. Don't worry, we are 60 days away from election day.

____________________

mahlers5th:

Let's face it, Dems. The Republican convention was supposed to be a total disaster -- what with Gustav bearing down on New Orleans, the media bearing down on Palin (a.k.a. Caribou Barbie), and everybody still glowing from the reflected light off of Obama's and Biden's brilliant smiles in Denver. But much to our collective surprise, they had a very respectable showing and Palin was a hit. Obama better pray that Hillary can pull his tuchus outta the fire. Obama's big mistake? Not choosing Hillary.

[cf. Thomas Roeser, “Obama’s BigMistake: Not Picking Hillary,” Chicago Daily Observer, Sept 4, 2008
http://cdobs.com/archive/our-columns…illary%2C1649/

Roeser's article also supplies illuminating details about Biden’s tendency to, um, let's say, slightly rewrite his personal history. Hillary’s exaggeration re: Bosnia sniper fire seems utterly minor by comparison.

____________________

Robi:

Where is the evidence Biden is pulling Obama down?

Biden is meant to reassure those who are wary of Obama's foreign policy experience.

____________________

NW Patrick:

MILLIONS of Dems including myself watched Palin to see who the hell she is.

____________________

SwingVote:

Stillow,

I guess you have an understanding problem. We are living in the US and I was talking about the unemployment in the US. Europe having worse unemployment is not relevant.

Correct me if I am wrong. Merkel, Sarkozy, Berlusconi and countless number of European leaders are not liberals. Moreover, European liberals' failures do not make liberals in the US responsible for a conservative president's failure to create jobs (he even kills jobs). Similarly, Islamic terrorists being conservatives does not make you responsible for their actions. You should stop seeing things "us and them" like Palin did. That's why many of the conservatives give free pass to Palin's daughter being pregnant. God forbid, If Obama's daughter was teenage and pregnant....

I am neither liberal or conservative. I am in the middle for most of the issues. I am not in favor of big government, however I believe in government's responsibilities. I am not in favor of gay marriage but I support their rights. I am not in favor of abortion but I don't want some people to impose their values to others.

Once again, instead of answering a question, you attacked some other territory. My question was simple though. If 6.1% unemployment was too high or low? Who or what to blame etc. Because this economic issues make more sense than sexiness, being celebrity, being woman, being black etc.

____________________

carl29:

Remember what I was talking about Hillary's dreams for 2012 and Sarah Palin: Well it wasn't just me.

Betsy Hart, a rightwinger, was thinking the same thing, Do you really believe that she and I are the only ones?Um..let me think: NO!!!!

"Can’t You Feel Hillary’s Pain?"

"On the one hand, Hillary Clinton could just be a very happy woman about now. Witnessing the blockbuster Sarah Palin speech at the Republican convention Thursday night, she has to feel more than a glimmer of hope that Barack Obama will lose in November, making her the presumptive nominee for the Democrats four years from now starting on election day 2008. (And giving her “I told you so” rights galore.)"

"Her moment of glory and vindication may keep getting delayed, but in her mind it’s all about patience, patience, patience."

"Hillary Clinton she watched what she had to immediately understand was the American people falling in love with Sarah Palin. Did she get a glimpse into the first woman President of the United States? Did she realize she’d seen the future – and it wasn’t Hillary Clinton?"

"'But wait a minute' you can almost hear Hillary Clinton say to all those ungrateful Americans – you people are supposed to want ME, ME! I’ve been waiting for this. I’ve sacrificed for this. I’ve stayed married to Bill because of this! I’m the one. You owe ME!'"

"'Her? Her? She doesn’t play the victim card! She doesn’t talk about glass ceilings and how she’s badly treated because she’s a woman. Are you people crazy? She’s not a woman, she’s pro-life. Pro-life. She likes babies! And guns. And men. And she’s really good-looking! It’s not fair!'"

"Yikes for Hillary. This has got to hurt."

*Betsy Hart is a syndicated columnist

Poor Hillary :-( she was so close when Sarah Palin slammed the door on her nose!!!!

____________________

NW Patrick:

As I said and MANY agree, Next week the polling average will settle somewhere around 3-4%. If obama is up 3-4% the day before the election, that's close to a landslide. In '04, Bush ended with a polling average of just under 2%. Be very worried Republicans. You are about finished. I have spoken with many indpendents who pretty much have said YAH Palin seems bright, but we don't know her, and SHE'S A REPUBLICAN. The problem is going to end up the Republican brand. They can say whatever they want, but the country won't go for it, it's won't work this time I'm afraid.

____________________

Robi:

Swing vote knows his stuff:

Maybe humanity is worth saving after all?

____________________

carl29:

O.K let's see:

Poor Hillary Clinton got 26 million viewers according to Nielsen.

Sarah Palin got 40 million viewers.

Ouch!!!! "ungrateful Americans – you people are supposed to want ME, ME!" Hillary was supposed to be your Girl!!! The one ready on day one, the girl with 18 million cracks on the hardest ceiling in the nation. The one with 35 years of experience, Bill's wife. I can't believe that almost 14 million people couldn't bring themselves to see me, but see the new girl on the block!!!!

Go Hillary!!!, I mean Sarah!!!

____________________

NW Patrick:

Indpendents will NOT go for Palin. Mark my words. She is WAY too conservative. Indpendents fall in the middle, and more SOCIALLY liberal than conservative. They tend to be fiscally conservative BUT the party in charge, you know, the fiscal conservative ran up the single largest deficit in WORLD HISTORY. So I think that fiscal argument might be shot. They only have fear and yehaaaa to run on. It's over...you watch.

____________________

Robi:

I'm recalling a certain Reagan speech writer and Wall Street Journal columnist saying something about the pick being "Political bull****" and how it's all "about narrative".

____________________

NW Patrick:

Better watch what you wish for. Hillary will be out campaigning for Obama come Monday. Sarah is NO HILLARY with women. Trust me.

____________________

faithhopelove:

As is typical, McCain is getting a "bounce" from his convention. By definition, a polling "bounce" fades. The national polling numbers should stabilize by Monday, at which point the state of the race will become clear. Most likely, the two candidates will be close.

According to 538, Obama won yesterday's polling (despite the Palin speech) in both the Rasmussen and Gallup trackers. See:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/

In the Rasmussen polling, McCain needs to win today's polling by about 2 points in order to remain where he is. In the Gallup polling, Obama needs to win today's polling by about 4 points to remain where he is. Part of the reason for McCain's improvement in the Rasmussen tracker is the fact that this pollster recently adjusted his party i.d. numbers in a way more favorable to the Republican. The "house effects" of both Rasmussen and Gallup favor McCain. The Diageo poll has a small sample for a national tracker.

____________________

Evolve:

@carl29

I don't really think Hillary wants to be pres in 2012 she wanted it now. This is the time that if a Dem gets in that history will remember. They will 50 seats in the House and a 10-12 advantage in the senate. She wanted in this year, cus this is the year a dem. would have the power and majority for sweeping change. We may see sweeping changes that we haven't seen since FDR with that type of majority. As the pendulum swings back her opportunity to make a mark on history fades.

____________________

carl29:

You don't get the point that I am making: Look, there are some crazy people, former Hillary supporters, who were dreaming of Obama losing this Nov. and then Hillary coming back in 2012. Now that picture looks "a little bit different," why? Well, if Obama loses, Gov. Palin will become the next Vice-President of the US, and in so doing, she will position herself a step close to becoming the first female president of the United States. She will be the GOP nominee in 2012 to face off Hillary. The GOP will make sure that McCain gives Gov. Palin a lot of visibility, forget about telling tall tales about sniper fire, so she can act very presidential.

Whom do you think will have the upper-hand in that duel? Well, the easiest way to get elected president is having served as vice-president. Also, take into account that in 2012, Hillary will be around 65 years of age, compared with Sarah's 48. See my point?

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@Stillow

like double digit unemployment under the 8 years of clinton? Excellent point, our economy did so much better once we canned his liberal ass. And while you're at it, check out the status of countries like Sweden, which have high tax rates but produce a plethora of excellent social services that their population enjoys as well as producing huge amounts of wealth and entrepreneurship.

From Forbes:

Shows a taxed-to-the-eyeballs welfare state where the government grabs more than 52% of the country's GDP—the highest percentage of any industrial country.

Shows a booming economy bubbling with entrepreneurial activity. Growth is predicted to be 3.5% for 2001; inflation, 1.7%; unemployment, 4% (less than half the European average). In 1999, according to the European Information Technology Observatory, Sweden ranked first in the world in investment in information technology and telecommunications. Venture capital is pouring into Sweden, and labor productivity is rocketing: From 1990 to 1999 productivity climbed 47% in Sweden, against 39% in the U.S. and 31% (on average) in the EU. Last year, Sweden topped the global standings in R&D spending as a percentage of GDP with 3.7% (in the U.S. it was 3.1%), according to the OECD.

Look, I know I'm making a simplistic argument that has a ton of other factors behind it. But don't generalize and say that europe is an example of why liberalism does not work. I'm not even FOR higher taxes...but consider some examples before you decide to over-generalize. There are a lot of european countries with HIGHER standards of living than us that are very liberal.

____________________

Evolve:

@carl29

I would agree with you that if McCann won Palin would have the upper hand. I just don't think Hillary is gonna run in 2012, it'd probably be Warner

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@stillow

In fact, I'll go one better Stillow. The Human Development Index is used to a comparative measure of poverty, literacy, education, life expectancy...many of the things you and I would love to see our country improve on, yes? It is a defined as "a standard means of measuring well-being, especially child welfare."

Here is the list of the top 10 countries in the world:

# Norway (=)
# Iceland (↑ 5)
# Australia (=)
# Luxembourg (↑ 11)
# Canada (↓ 1)
# Sweden (↓ 4)
# Switzerland (↑ 4)
# Ireland (↑ 2)
# Belgium (↓ 3)
# United States (↓ 2)

Now tell me, Stillow, how many countries above us would you perceive to embrace Liberalism?

sigh...

____________________

carl29:

Dear Evolve: You really believe that Hillary wasn't thinking about 2012? Please!!! It was obvious for everyone that she will make the comeback. However, being political savvy as they are, the Clintons understand what Palin means for Hillary's future. Unfortunaly, there is nothing they can do. If Obama wins in Nov. she will have to wait 8 years to run again, unless she challenges Obama in the primaries, just like Ted Kennedy did to Carter. If McCain wins, Sarah Palin will run in 2012. Now, the Clintons are kind of in a box.

Hillary needed McCain to pick a weak V.P., a regular guy. So, she could comeback in 2012 with all the women anxious to make history. Now, it seems that the one on her way to make history is Sarah.

____________________

carl29:

Totally agree Evolve. I think that if McCain-Palin wins, Hillary will not run in 2012. The Clintons are not political dummies. They understand that Palin's presidential campaign would start on Nov. 5th, 2008.

____________________

thoughtful:

Gallup is saying the full convention bump will be there in the Monday numbers!

Will the GOP go completely negative next week: we will see. The bump so far whilst it is at the top end of my range +2, it has to be very disappointing as McCain loses by a fair few EVs based on these numbers!

McCain has got to 46% with Gallup for one day previously and 47% for 3 days with Ras(before ID weight change).

The electorate is voting for President and, last night, John McCain looked tired, old and worn out against his youthful Veep pick and Obama.

____________________

Robi:

A little research shows that, in 1996, the unemployment rate was 5.3.

What is it now?

____________________

Evolve:

I also think if Obama wins you'll end up seeing Hillary in the Supreme Court ... nothing would stick in the craw of the Rep party than having to deal with her for the next 20yrs or so

____________________

carl29:

6.1% as today

____________________

RedSoxFan:

I find it quite humorous that McCain is trying to wow the nation with the pick of Palin. Everyone talks about how great of a pick it was, how great she can speak, and that all the women in the country will run to the voting booths to get her elected. If that is case why is he still behind in almost every poll out there? He trails Obama in almost every swing state, albeit it is only a couple of points in some states, but other states Obama has a good size lead. He was talked out of the guys he wanted by the base of his party, and now he is paired with someone who doesn't help him a lot. It is like the base of party is saying we still do not like you Mr. McCain, and they lied to him saying Palin gave him a good chance to win. I kind of feel sad for Mr. McCain he is an American hero, and his party it seems is sabotaging his campaign.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

can anyone tell me how many of the countries that have a higher standard of living than us embrace liberal policies?

____________________

Robi:

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/UNRATE.txt

This is all the unemployment rates up until now. Isn't it nice when people do research and don't make false claims?

____________________

carl29:

@"I also think if Obama wins you'll end up seeing Hillary in the Supreme Court ... nothing would stick in the craw of the Rep party than having to deal with her for the next 20yrs or so."

This is totally evil!!!! Republicans will be up in arms. Do you want to see a real rebellion, a revolution in D.C? That confirmation will be the biggest soap opera in the country's history. Everyone glued to the tube!!!

____________________

mrut:

It is interesting that so many people tuned in for McCain's speech. That's not necessarily good for him.

Everyone already knew he was the war hero, though it's true that they did learn more details about his POW experience (at least, I did). His POW stories were the most interesting and moving part of his speech.

The problem is that the rest of the speech was boring and there was no policy for economic recovery presented.

Campaigns that rely too heavily on the military heroism of the candidate don't do well. No one can dispute the greater military heroism of George H. W. Bush 1992, Bob Dole 1996, Al Gore 2000, and John Kerry 2004 when compared to their opponents.

War heros tend to feel disdain for their opponents and they make the mistake of thinking that the election will be a referendum on who has more honor. That's what we give people medals for, though--elections have more to do with the future. This is why policy matters, whether you are a dope-smoking draft dodger or a brave fighter pilot.

____________________

Robi:

Bill dramatically reduced the unemployment rate stillow. Stop listening to FOX for your info.

____________________

Lappel1:

'Ok lets talk unemployment. Europe is into the whole liberalsim is great thing.....go look up there unemployment #'s and then come back to this forum............liberalism doesn't work, it leads to double digit unemployment....large tax burdens and more dependency.'

F'in idiocy, pure and simple. In Europe, the word 'liberalism' is applied to what in America is called economic conservatism.' But the idiocy is deeper than than that. 'It' -- as if there were one thing out there, 'liberalism.' 'Doesn't work' -- not, 'has not worked' or 'will not work,' but 'does not.' What shall we say about the 1990s in America, run by Clinton, or the nougties in Great Britain, with very low unemployment, run by Labour, and involving a government which guarantees housing and medical care to everyone? (Did you not know that, Stillow? Of course not; evidence is not your forte.) What shall we say about France, a 'social democracy,' even under Sarkozy: high unemployment relative to the US (though under double digits for the past 15 months), but a very low rate of poverty relative to the US. And a much higher life expectancy, and lower infant mortality rate.

Stillow, you need to go home, get off the internet, and read a book. Because your arguments are ahistorical, simplistic, and bigoted. May I suggest you begin with Rousseau's The Social Contract. . . . Oh sorry, I forgot, you don't have time for French people, or history, or thought. You prefer to trade in simpleminded accusations.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@ robi

So let me get this straight...Clinton left Bush with an unemployment rate at about 3% and now it's up to 6% right before his reign ends?

____________________

Evolve:

I know that Ireland, Canada, Australia have National healthcare> I thin Sweeden and Norway do also ... looking it up now

____________________

carl29:

Wow!!! In August 2000, when Bill still was president, unemployment was 4.1%. Unbelievable how things look like 8 years later.

____________________

Robi:

I apologize stillow I should have read what you wrote before I got back on the forum. You weren't saying that. My bad but look at the stats anyways.

____________________

Robi:

My job is done here **flies off into the sunset** lol

____________________

atreides:

The problem with Palin in Alaska isn't just her record. Alaska is practicing sort of a semi socialism themselves. The oil wealth is divvied up and distributed to every man, women, boy and girl in the state. This year a family of 4 will nearly get 10K including a $1200 energy credit engineered by Palin. Alaskans pay no sales or income taxes which means basic social services are bing provided free of charge. In addition the state and employers provide 80% of the healthcare bill. One newspaper even stated that Alaska was the only state that income redistribution was written into the constitution. But despite the kind wealth that the state has, only 1 in 5 Alaskans will finish college and the state has one of the highest high school drop rates in the country. Sound like the reformer needed to do some reforming.

____________________

Robi:

Oh btw 7.3 unemployment rate to 4.0 is pretty impressive in 8 years if you ask me.

Bush went from 4.0 to 6.1 (right now)

Yeah dems don't know how to take care of the economy

____________________

BarackO'Clinton:

McCain's no longer polling in the high 30's.

I guess he did get a bounce.

____________________

Lappel1:

All governments in Western Europe have national health care. Most also provide nearly indefinite unemployment benefits.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

lol.

where did Stillow go? To europe to check his stats?

____________________

Robi:

The European economy is very hard to understand.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@Robi

Certainly, because Europe is comprised of dozens of individual nations with different govts. standards and policies.

Which is WHY you do not GENERALIZE (stillow)

____________________

mrut:

@atreides

Right about Alaska. There is no other state in the Union where high oil prices have resulted in a flood of revenue to the state coffers. Almost every other governor has dealt with serious challenges in recent years, requiring budget cuts and re-prioritizing of expenditures.

Even with the geyser of oil tax revenues of the past few years, Alaska receives 50% more federal money than it sends back to the federal government. That's what makes the "reformer" and "anti-earmark" label so unsustainable.

____________________

Robi:

Maybe Bush Jr. will be able to surpass his dad not only in Iraq, but in the unemployment rate as well.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

You can't make fun of Europe's economy republicans when its trouncing ours in growth currently.

____________________

Lappel1:

The minimum wage in the United Kingdom, where I live, is over 5 1/2 pounds an hour, that is about 9 US dollars an hour -- and medical care is free. For everyone, regardless. Because unemployment benefits are indefinite, a portion of the population is doubtless 'dependent,' and a major social problem, but this portion of the population does not pose nearly so great a social problem as that posed by the poor in America. There were fewer homicides in the UK last year (pop. 60 million) than in Michigan. And unemployment has been at 3-4 percent for years. (This will change as the recession hits.) The standard of living here is lower than in the US, measured in the aggregate. But inequality is lower, and the 'HDI' is only slightly worse than the US's. The United Kingdom is considered one of the most conservative of states in Europe in terms of social policies. Here, Europeans complain about the UK being too 'liberal' -- i.e. too laissez faire -- and people on all sides of the political divide are grumbling about moral and political stagnation.

But if you want to understand 'Europe', which is not only a lot of different states but also a 'Union', you might being with the idea that it is taken for granted in the Union that no society benefits from wealth unless everyone benefits. There is still a belief in equality here, even if equality is more a belief than a reality.

____________________

dave101:

More than any other single factor, people vote for their jobs when the economy is doing poor.

The perception is that the Republicans ruined our economy (as evidenced by McCain's "divorce" from the party and Bush during his speech).

Come November, ordinary folks will choose Obama's middle class tax cuts over McCain's preferential treatment of the rich.

____________________

RedSoxFan:

yes kerrchdavis that is correct in 1992 the unemployment rate was 7.5%, in 1999 the unemployment rate had dropped to 4.1% the lowest since 1969.

____________________

thoughtful:

I think it would be more useful to compare US living standards to Canada's.

Anecdotal my son, who lives in the England, had a liver transplant on the NHS and I have to say absolute 1st class care and ongoing. The whole thing would be ruinous in the US without top tier Medical Insurance.

With regards Medical Services in Europe although there is National Health free at the point of demand inmember states, there is also a private sector earning what would imagine to be $ billions annually particularly in Western Europe including the United Kingdom.

____________________

Robi:

RedSoxFan:

That was me buddy...lol

____________________

Basil:

TV ratings don't mean anything. Like many people, I watched Palin and McCain to see how the oil interests were pitching change. Drill, baby, drill?

Look at McCain's campaign versus Obama's vis a vis lobbyists. There's no comparison. Obama is far more trustworthy in this regard. McCain's campaign is crawling with lobbyists. Obama's isn't.

____________________

RedSoxFan:

Robi:

My Bad....lol

____________________

marctx:

Were did all you out of touch liberals come from? Yeah, I ended my sentence with a preposition. You pat yourselves on the back and defend european values...then wonder why the rest of America hates you. Out of touch liberals are just like HS geeks that never quite get what it takes to fit into the mainstream. Fox news is the football team. Rush L is the quarterback. Liberals are the nerds. Watch last place nerdfest MSNBC and watch your star trek re-runs. We'll be playing sports and hunting. Augula Obama is like the Fresh Princes brother.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

No, it was MEE!!! Robi, stealing my work! :)

____________________

Lappel1:

@marctx

That's a very smart comeback. Calling people names. Are you still in high school?

____________________

AJ:

@ marctx
Yeah, that's it...being smart is horrible! By the way, most of those HS nerds you are talking about own those football teams you talk about!

____________________

Stillow:

@kerrchdavis

First off, Bill Clinton is not a liberal...he is a "self descirbed" southern moderate democrat, in addition he had a conservative congress to work with. Secondly, and feel free to look it up, the average unemployment rate under Bush, is lower than it was under Clinton. That's just how it is...and Bush inherited a recession, inherited financial scandals from Enron, Worldcom and others, 9/11 hit 9 months into his presidency....and yes now we are headed into a cyclical downturn.
European conservatives are more liberal than our domestic libersls in many areas....Europe embraces liberalism and they have double digit unemployment to show for it. You bring up Sweeden, what if Russia decided to invade Sweeden? You think the Sweeds have a strong enough military to defend against people who would do them harm? Would all those social programs protect them? Nope, Sweeden, like nearly every other nation on Earth owes its freedoms and prosperity to the United States! Why? Because we invest in our military because the burden is on us and no other to stop countries like Russia, China, Iran, N. Korea, etc from engaing in dirty deeds aroun the world. So maybe we don't get 8 weeks of vacation every year like they have in sweeden, maybe we don't have entitlements up the wazoo, but ya know what....at least we can defend ourselves and the world against unfreindly nations. Without the United States there is no force who can stand up to countries like Russia or China....so before you tell me how great Sweeden is and how crappy America is for not having all those social programs....maybe you should cosndier the fact that social programs don't protect you...........they simply make it easier for you to do nothing!

____________________

thoughtful:

marctx

What's the problem bounce not big enough?

____________________

Robi:

Kerrchdavis:

You are not statistics you can believe in, you are statistics you can xerox! (what the hell am I saying?)

marctx:

I....I got nothing....I think normal people don't need my input on this one.

Way to put substance into the debate.

____________________

marctx:

I'm just kidding libs. Have a great weekend! The bells about to ring!

____________________

RedSoxFan:

Marctx:

Let's see guy, I was a four year letterman at my high school, I played offensive line in college, and I also played baseball in college. I am quite athletic, but I am also intelligent enough to know that the system we have now is not working. The last 8 years we have seen jobs go over seas, unemployment as of today is out of control, and the dollar sucks around the world, and if Rush L. is your quarterback, I'm blitzing his ass all day. Spending is way up, and now we have a pitbull on the campaign trail....woohoo!!!. The republicans put on blinders and can't see the forrest for the trees, take your head away from the rifle scope and take a look with both how screwed up things are.

____________________

Robi:

...Stillow...cmon...

The average means nothing when you look at the trend.

1992-01-01 7.3
1992-02-01 7.4
1992-03-01 7.4
1992-04-01 7.4
1992-05-01 7.6
1992-06-01 7.8
1992-07-01 7.7
1992-08-01 7.6
1992-09-01 7.6
1992-10-01 7.3
1992-11-01 7.4
1992-12-01 7.4
1993-01-01 7.3
1993-02-01 7.1
1993-03-01 7.0
1993-04-01 7.1
1993-05-01 7.1
1993-06-01 7.0
1993-07-01 6.9
1993-08-01 6.8
1993-09-01 6.7
1993-10-01 6.8
1993-11-01 6.6
1993-12-01 6.5
1994-01-01 6.6
1994-02-01 6.6
1994-03-01 6.5
1994-04-01 6.4
1994-05-01 6.1
1994-06-01 6.1
1994-07-01 6.1
1994-08-01 6.0
1994-09-01 5.9
1994-10-01 5.8
1994-11-01 5.6
1994-12-01 5.5
1995-01-01 5.6
1995-02-01 5.4
1995-03-01 5.4
1995-04-01 5.8
1995-05-01 5.6
1995-06-01 5.6
1995-07-01 5.7
1995-08-01 5.7
1995-09-01 5.6
1995-10-01 5.5
1995-11-01 5.6
1995-12-01 5.6
1996-01-01 5.6
1996-02-01 5.5
1996-03-01 5.5
1996-04-01 5.6
1996-05-01 5.6
1996-06-01 5.3
1996-07-01 5.5
1996-08-01 5.1
1996-09-01 5.2
1996-10-01 5.2
1996-11-01 5.4
1996-12-01 5.4
1997-01-01 5.3
1997-02-01 5.2
1997-03-01 5.2
1997-04-01 5.1
1997-05-01 4.9
1997-06-01 5.0
1997-07-01 4.9
1997-08-01 4.8
1997-09-01 4.9
1997-10-01 4.7
1997-11-01 4.6
1997-12-01 4.7
1998-01-01 4.6
1998-02-01 4.6
1998-03-01 4.7
1998-04-01 4.3
1998-05-01 4.4
1998-06-01 4.5
1998-07-01 4.5
1998-08-01 4.5
1998-09-01 4.6
1998-10-01 4.5
1998-11-01 4.4
1998-12-01 4.4
1999-01-01 4.3
1999-02-01 4.4
1999-03-01 4.2
1999-04-01 4.3
1999-05-01 4.2
1999-06-01 4.3
1999-07-01 4.3
1999-08-01 4.2
1999-09-01 4.2
1999-10-01 4.1
1999-11-01 4.1
1999-12-01 4.0
2000-01-01 4.0
2000-02-01 4.1
2000-03-01 4.0
2000-04-01 3.8
2000-05-01 4.0
2000-06-01 4.0
2000-07-01 4.0
2000-08-01 4.1
2000-09-01 3.9
2000-10-01 3.9
2000-11-01 3.9
2000-12-01 3.9
2001-01-01 4.2
2001-02-01 4.2
2001-03-01 4.3
2001-04-01 4.4
2001-05-01 4.3
2001-06-01 4.5
2001-07-01 4.6
2001-08-01 4.9
2001-09-01 5.0
2001-10-01 5.3
2001-11-01 5.5
2001-12-01 5.7
2002-01-01 5.7
2002-02-01 5.7
2002-03-01 5.7
2002-04-01 5.9
2002-05-01 5.8
2002-06-01 5.8
2002-07-01 5.8
2002-08-01 5.7
2002-09-01 5.7
2002-10-01 5.7
2002-11-01 5.9
2002-12-01 6.0
2003-01-01 5.8
2003-02-01 5.9
2003-03-01 5.9
2003-04-01 6.0
2003-05-01 6.1
2003-06-01 6.3
2003-07-01 6.2
2003-08-01 6.1
2003-09-01 6.1
2003-10-01 6.0
2003-11-01 5.8
2003-12-01 5.7
2004-01-01 5.7
2004-02-01 5.6
2004-03-01 5.8
2004-04-01 5.6
2004-05-01 5.6
2004-06-01 5.6
2004-07-01 5.5
2004-08-01 5.4
2004-09-01 5.4
2004-10-01 5.5
2004-11-01 5.4
2004-12-01 5.4
2005-01-01 5.2
2005-02-01 5.4
2005-03-01 5.2
2005-04-01 5.1
2005-05-01 5.1
2005-06-01 5.0
2005-07-01 5.0
2005-08-01 4.9
2005-09-01 5.1
2005-10-01 5.0
2005-11-01 5.0
2005-12-01 4.8
2006-01-01 4.7
2006-02-01 4.7
2006-03-01 4.7
2006-04-01 4.7
2006-05-01 4.7
2006-06-01 4.6
2006-07-01 4.7
2006-08-01 4.7
2006-09-01 4.5
2006-10-01 4.4
2006-11-01 4.5
2006-12-01 4.4
2007-01-01 4.6
2007-02-01 4.5
2007-03-01 4.4
2007-04-01 4.5
2007-05-01 4.5
2007-06-01 4.6
2007-07-01 4.7
2007-08-01 4.7
2007-09-01 4.7
2007-10-01 4.8
2007-11-01 4.7
2007-12-01 5.0
2008-01-01 4.9
2008-02-01 4.8
2008-03-01 5.1
2008-04-01 5.0
2008-05-01 5.5
2008-06-01 5.5
2008-07-01 5.7
2008-08-01 6.1

____________________

Robi:

You're being dishonest.

____________________

RedSoxFan:

ok, I raged before he said have a nice weekend. You to marctx

____________________

kerrchdavis:

you're right Stillow. You owned me.

Anyone want to tell me what's wrong about this sentence:

"Nope, Sweeden, like nearly every other nation on Earth owes its freedoms and prosperity to the United States! "

____________________

Robi:

I would but I want to let someone else get some class participation

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@robi

lol,sometimes I feel like I'm teaching pre-school :)

____________________

Stillow:

@Robi

That's typical left wing distraction, avoid the fact, spin it and mov eon....lets see how well you do with an inheirted recession, tech bubble burst 6 months into office, 9/11 9 months into office....

liberalism has a key indicator, its called Europe....look at thos enations, high unemployment, much higher than us, All but Britain have no real way to defend themselves if attacked....and youguys on the left wanna tell me we shoudl be more like Sweeden? If we took that approach we'd all be speaking German today, for those of us who were allowed to live anyway.......Gimme a break!

____________________

thoughtful:

Stillow

I thought you had a big down on Bush?

Russia is like a 3rd World country, it has a nucleur deterrant. It has a big army, it lost a big war in Afghanistan that bankrupted it to the extent that The Soviet Union collapsed!

Russia has a lot of Oil and Gas and western partners like BP who derive 25% of group's annual profits from their Russian business .

What if China invaded Singapore, Australia?

How many have died in Iraq and Vietnam, fighting completely unnecesary wars?

The World has moved on.
`

____________________

thoughtful:

Averages are bunk,

The average American has slightly more than one testicle!
Gone fishin back later

____________________

Robi:

Why are facts called "liberal spin"?

You made a misleading statement on the "average" unemployment rate comparing Bush and Clinton and I called you on it. Now you're changing the subject.

Admit that your statement was misleading and then we'll move on.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@stillow

lol, just wow, you're losing the plot buddy."atacked," "speaking german," "allowed to live."

And don't tell Robi to stop spinning...thats what you are doing. "Oh, it's coz of Sept 11th and Worldcom yada yada"

Listen, lets say I buy into your spin and the state of the economy is bad because of unforeseen circumstances and external factors. Do we really want a guy that admits his knowledge of economic issues is weak trying to steady the ship? Give me a break..

____________________

illinoisindie:

wow... "Please give these people some polls to talk about some of the insanity is unbearable"
Can't complain too much I keep coming back.

Stillow I have a question... if the Republicans are soo good at keeping us safe why did 911 happen in the first place

____________________

Stillow:

@kerrchdavis

Go ahead and erase the united states from history from the year 1900 onward. Germany most likely wins WW2...Hitler carries on withits purification of the human race, killing billions and billions who do not fit his arian race ideals. Don't like it? Ok lets assume Germany didn't win....leaving the Soviets to win. Was the mighty Sweeden going to stand up and top the spread of communism? A form of g'ment which put sits people in to total slavery, wait in line for your food, cannot travel, can be put in jail and never heard from again.....I assume Sweeden would have stopped communism expansion? Lets assume the Soviets were good people and forgot there expansionist and evil ways...who was gonna stop Saddam in 1991 when he invaded Kuwait? Sweeden agai nto the rescue? Or would it be the French with there white flags again? Who's out there stopping mad countires from getting WMD? Is Sweeden doing that too?
You liberals have zero clue on how the real world works....you think everyone thinks like you, we are all just big warm fuzzy people....its america's fault the world has evil in it, if we put aways our guns, so will the chineese, terrorists, russians, n. koreans, iranians, etc......So ya, tell me which country doesn't owe us for there freedom....cus there's only one nation on this planet who can defend freedoms against enemies like nazi's, communists and terrorists.......and i assure you, its not Sweeden.
Life and the world is just a bit more complex than it is in the halls of Harvard and the make beleive utopia libs make for themselves.

Peace thru strength........Goldwater / Reagan.

____________________

Robi:

Stillow says WE don't know how the real world works? Yeah, ok...

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Actually Stillow, your arguments are a perfect example of the choice we have in this election:

Fear vs Hope

Your fear of being attacked and losing military power blinds you from the hope many of us have in a revived economy, better social programs, better employment rates, wealth and prosperity, a better environment, the respect of the world back...you know, the stuff that isn't as important as our policing of the world.

Judging by what matters to you, you really should be voting for John McCain. He does represent more of what you care about.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@ stillow,

lol, you've really lost it man...I'm sorry.

"So ya, tell me which country doesn't owe us for there freedom....cus there's only one nation on this planet who can defend freedoms against enemies like nazi's, communists and terrorists"

just, wow. Is anybody else watching this self destruction? And if you're really trying to predict the cause and effect relationship of 100 years of history if the United States had not been a apart of it...you've really lost it, man.

____________________

Robi:

And how bout them polls?

____________________

Stillow:

Ok, so lets totally defund the military, lets draw our military spending down to what the average in europe is....lets do that.

Who's gonna protect you? Just give me an answer, its its valid i will accept it...just tell me who's gonna stop russia from gobbling up its former empire cutting off things like natural gas and oil flow?

Simple question, lets assume we spend now what european countries do...and we free up all the money for nice g'ment entitlement programs. just tell me who protects us agaisnt he next hitler? the next soviet uprising? Just tell me who? while we are here enjoying our nice healthcare and our 8 weeks of vacation.....who will save us

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@robi

Ok, polls

SUSA is reporting that insanity is on the rise among members of the far-right.

Unfortunately, due to investments in military power and misguided wars, the budget for psychiatric help cannot cover ever stil...person in need of urgent care

____________________

Robi:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ng1yXgyY8Uo&feature=related

This is more funny than me trying to prove a point (although you could if you wanted to)

Apparently Stillow's party knows how the world works.

____________________

Robi:

We apparently ALL have a psychological problem according to McCain.

____________________

brambster:

Would you guys please all stop arguing with Stillow, Boskop, MarcTX, and every other radical nut. Nothing at all is being learned from this and it's drowning out legitimate discussion.

Arguing with a radical nut gets you no where. Do you think these people are going to change their minds? How many times do they have to bring up Hitler for you to understand that???

____________________

Robi:

...my god...HE'S RIGHT!...I'm gonna try to stop again. (It's just so easy to get pulled back into it cause it's just so much fun to hear what crap they will say next)

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

McCain's problem is that his THINKING is wrapped up in the 20th century. It's not as easy as good vs. evil like it was in wars of the past. It's the players, the shakers, and the movers. McCain's foreign policy is 1 dimensional and is completely similar of Bush's "You are either with us or against us mentality." Give it up neocons, the Nazis, Facists, and Communists of the 20th century aren't coming back for your rodeo show.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

sorry, brambster :(

____________________

Stillow:

I figured you guys would do the typical liberal thing, when your logic is put into context. the answer is there is no other country who can protect from those things, that is just how it is. Notice how your responses are LOL's...and rhetoric which is based on nothing. Look how loony htis guy is, that type of thing....its because when the logic behind liberalism is spelled out, even liberals can't defend it. Defund the military to support social programs....Right, I am sure as the Nazi's got close to France, they thought about stopping and saying "wow, look how evolved these people are, we should just go home". Liberals are a perfect example of "its better to live on your knees, than to die on your feet".

And you guys actually wonder why liberals never get elected.....Carter got in in 76....and they threw him out so fast he didn't know what hit him....he couldn't even stand up to Iran to free our hostages, Iran knew he was weak and would never do anything.....member what happened when reagan was elected? the Iranians freed our men....because Reagan stood upand fought....and din't back down and cower....

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Robi, you're the WORST! You keep telling us to start arguing and then you start again, lol! :D

____________________

kerrchdavis:

*stop

____________________

Robi:

I want to try something. I'll do it too. For everyone who is going to pull out a statistic or something they call a fact, I want a link to a document or something that will show that what you said is true. It might be tiresome but it's better than lying like some people tend to do here. Opinions are fine, but if you're going to call something a fact or make a statement that needs facts, SHOW US THE FACTS!!!!

And no more "media bias" talk cause proclamations prove nothing. Right-wing, left-wing, argue facts not what you think is bias or not and if you think they're wrong or dishonest like when Stillow talked about the average unemployment rate, don't call them names or say it's left wing or right wing spin or whatever excuses you have. SHOW FACTS TO COUNTER THEIR CLAIM!!! If you can't then don't make a contribution cause from now on, I will not consider a "fact" credible until I see a source for it.

There's too much crap and false "facts" and media bias accusations and that gets us nowhere. If you think that our statements are bias or spin, prove it with facts and not proclamations.

GOD!!!!!

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

Clinton fought in the Balkins and defeated Maloslavich so get over your 1970's characterization of liberals Stillow and get into the next millennium. Democrats fight wars and Republicans over spend and break budgets. If anything both parties are largely the same.

____________________

Stillow:

lucky for you libs i have meeting shte res tof the day, but i enjoyed once again pointing out liberals have no clue....its great on college campuses, but i nthe real world, it has no logical deployment. g'ment programs, entitlements, extra vacation time....none of that provides the essential item which is requried for any country to survive...that item is freedom. The moment you lay down your arms, it will not start a trend of others to do the same, it invites your destruction. there's a reason liberals don't get elected, mcgonvern, carter, mondale, gore, kerry and now obama. because i nthe end the people know that g'ment handouts are no substitution for security, social programs no substitution for self worth.

Sorry guys, you lose, as history repeatedly shows us.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Fact: Stillow is a right-wing nut

Source: http://futurefeeder.com/wp-content/IImages/elephant.jpg

____________________

Robi:

Stillow:

No Facts, no credit.

____________________

Robi:

NEW POLL yougov: US

OB42-MP39

____________________

zotz:

Stillow-
Sorry to pop your Reagan fantasy but Saddam had more to do with freeing the hostages than Reagan did. And the sissy Europeans that you despise so much were also pressuring Iran to free the hostages. In other words it was an international effort, not because they were afraid of the great Ronald Reagan. You seem to be infected by a cult of personality hero worship.

Which candidate wants to rebuild our foreign alliences? Obama. Which one favors the Bush style "screw the fereners" approach, McCain.
McCain is like Bush in foreign policy and he is like Bush in domestic policy. That 95% McCain voting record agreement with Bush is no accident. Bush and McCain, those two are the soulmates!

____________________

Robi:

zotz:

Where is the source that supports your claim?

____________________

hooya:

@Stillow

Have you ever thought that the reason so many countries and organizations hate us so much that they might want to act aggressively towards us is because we, as an unfortunate national policy, think it's our job to police the world? Would you consider the other option that if we weren't such bullies on the playground maybe we wouldn't have given the terrists any reason to hate us so much?

I also question your idea that the republicans somehow want to engage in our freedom. Sure they say it, but what have they done to protect our personal freedom and choice? We are more of a big brother and police state now than we were before 9/11, and despite what the GOP would have you believe I somehow doubt that the increasing lack of personal freedom (patriot act, etc.) has truly protected us from some other hypothetical attack. Remember, the planes on 9/11 were hijacked with Box Cutters, not handguns, shoe bombs, shampoo bottles filled with whatever they think we're going to put in our shampoo bottles, or anything else like that.

The simple fact is that McCain wants to continue this line of attack on personal freedom (including repealing RvW) and this is simply the WRONG direction to take this country.

And then we can start talking about the economy.

____________________

Robi:

....my idea is never going to work is it?

____________________

Kris:

"Did you see her cool rock and roll hand gestures!!!!"

I think they were secret terrorist hand signals . . .

____________________

Robi:

hahahahahahaha!

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

Stillow I recommend re-reading your history and telling less of your high school comparisons of liberals and conservatives. Geopolitics isn't a game of Cowboy's and Indians. Regan is dead, stop living in the past. This is why Clinton beat Bush Sr. Living in the old era will cause you to be unelected and McCain exudes these principles. We live in an era now where evil calls itself good and good becomes evil. It is far more complicated that 1-Dimensional Neoconservative brand of political ideology. The Realists rule the roost now.

____________________

Robi:

Realists like IR theory or realists like people who aren't crazy?

____________________

zotz:

Robi-
The story of the Iran hostage crisis is complicated and there were many different players. Reagan was not in power during the negotiations and had little role in getting the hostages released.

"In 1980, the death of the shah in Egypt and the invasion of Iran by Iraq (see Iran-Iraq War) made the Iranians more receptive to resolving the hostage crisis. In the United States, failure to resolve the crisis contributed to Ronald Reagan's defeat of Carter in the presidential election. After the election, with the assistance of Algerian intermediaries, successful negotiations began. On Jan. 20, 1981, the day of President Reagan's inauguration, the United States released almost $8 billion in Iranian assets and the hostages were freed after 444 days in Iranian detention; the agreement gave Iran immunity from lawsuits arising from the incident."
http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0825448.html

____________________

Robi:

zotz:

I'm well aware of the story and that the Iranians waited for carter to leave out of spite. But I'm holding EVERYONE to the standard of providing sources because the false claims made in this forum is insane and I think we should be educated about the issues and if that means going through a little more trouble for the sake of being informed, so be it.

I never said you were wrong.

____________________

IHateChickenLittles:

@Stillow

Typical Reagan worship with little regard for history. The freeing of the Iranian hostages happened on the day of his inauguration and was the result of INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATION; you know that boogeyman you're afraid of now. The Algerian Accords (the agreement that freed the hostages in return for, gasp, U.S. concessions on the sanctions previously imposed on Iran (damn appeasers)) were spearheaded by Warren Christopher, Jimmy Carter's Deputy SOS. It had all of nothing to do with Reagan.

Some other Reagan fun facts. When Reagan took office deficits were about $80 billion, or about 2.5 percent of gross domestic product. Within only two years, he enlarged the deficit to more than $200 billion, or 6 percent of GDP. He broke the mold on deficit spending. No president to that point could even touch Reagan's borrow and spend ways......

____________________

IHateChickenLittles:

More Reagan fun facts. Following the bombing of the Marine barracks in Lebanon in 1983, Reagan pledged to keep forces there. The U.S. never actually launched any serious retaliation for the attacks, but, you'll love this Stillow, the FRENCH did in response to an attack on their barracks. Of course later, Reagan pulled all of the Marines out of Lebanon in retreat, going back on his pledge and dare I say it, emboldening the terrorists. So to sum up, Reagan was, by far, the biggest borrower and spender in American history to that point (he's still up there), had diddlysquat to do with Iranian hostages being released, retreated from a terrorist attack that killed 241 soldiers, and oh yeah was quite cordial to Saddam Hussein. hahahahahah. I can keep going on the Reagan economy if you want.

____________________

Snowspinner:

It is notable that McCain's numbers never went down that much in Obama's bump - what the DNC seems to have done is consolidate leaners for Obama, and what the RNC seems to have done is consolidate leaners for McCain.

Two observations here.

1) This was always going to happen. Leaners were going to break for the person they were leaning towards. The question is how much the leaners turn out on election day. Obama has a more thorough strategy to attract these leaners, but we shouldn't underestimate Palin-driven energy for the Republicans either.

2) The battle remains true undecideds, who are a small enough share of the electorate that there is *no* good polling on who they are or what they want except campaign internals that they sure as hell ain't releasing.

3) This is still an electoral college battle, and more than that, a battle in a limited range of places: Montana + North Dakota, Nevada, Colorado, Florida, Virginia, and Ohio. Those are the interesting places. McCain is defending in all of them. And if Obama wins any of the six, he has the election. So the question is, how did the conventions play in those specific areas. And there's no data there yet at all, making most of this a fun exercise in Net flaming, not serious discussion.

____________________

Andrew_in_California:

IR Theory :)

____________________

brambster:

Here's your deficit as a percentage of GDP graph:

http://zfacts.com/p/318.html

Hopefully the conclusions from this are obvious to ALL.

____________________

Robi:

Andrew:

I don't know if realism can work anymore in IR because realists don't care about terrorism in IR theory because they don't think it's enough to threaten a country's security. Realism was great during the cold war, but I think we live in a world of neo-liberalism. The fact that we haven't rolled over Saudi Arabia is good evidence too support that.

____________________

Robi:

Plus realists are pulling out their hair whenever they look at Iraq.

____________________

saywhat90:

@stillow

here is how ww2 really went down the reason why we "won" the war is because hitler underestimated russia. he invaded russia after signing a non-aggression treaty with them. attacked in the winter. russians destroyed everything they could taking enough supplies for themselve and hiding. stalin ordered this to happened. anyways germany lost alot of troops during that invasion and russia joined in the war against russia. this was what changed the tide of the war. now havinn to fight a war on four fronts germany was overtaxing their military. this gave the allies the opportunity to begin a push from two fronts. south and west. america palyed a great part but we were not the main reason why the war turned in the allies favor.

____________________

Robi:

saywhay90:

What book or source is that assumption from?

____________________

Robi:

Everyone:

obviously things we find as obvious facts don't seem to match with each other. So when I ask for sources, I'm not saying it's true or not. I'm just saying show the sources so people can't say "you're wrong" even though you're telling them the sky is blue

____________________

saywhat90:

it is from my world history and the history channel. hell , when i first heard it i didnt believe it neither. but when i lived in germany twice (there my foreign policy experience, hey i should run for president) it was the one thing my german friend said caused hitler slow decline. they blame the russians and the enlgish for losing the enlgish they blame becasue they bombed them to hell and back and england would nto surrender. they poured alot of resources into conquering russia and england and neither faltered. mind they were telling me what there grandparents and parents had told them

____________________

saywhat90:

im talking life expericne here. oh and german never liked american neither. love our money but not us. this again from life experience

____________________

Tom:

The state polls, which we should start seeing next week, should be interesting. I don't think McCain's speech will have as much impact as Obama's did. Heck, there were reports of sleeping delegats in the Utah and Puerto Rico sections on the convention floor Thursday night.

Assuming the current red/blue divide that is on the current main page holds, McCain needs one of the following to happen;
McCain Wins FL, OH, NC, VA, CO, NV, and NH
McCain Wins FL, OH, NC, VA, CO, NV and MT
McCain Wins FL, OH, NC, VA, CO, NV and ND
McCain Wins FL, OH, NC, VA, CO, NH and MT
McCain Wins FL, OH, NC, VA, CO, NH and ND

Obama can win if one of the following happens;
Obama Wins FL
Obama Wins OH
Obama Wins NC
Obama Wins VA
Obama Wins CO and NV
Obama Wins CO and NH
Obama Wins CO and MT
Obama Wins CO and ND
Obama Wins NV, NH and MT
Obama Wins NV, MT and ND
Obama Wins NH, MT and ND

A tie is possible if Obama carries either CO or NV and NH. In those scenarios, Obama would be ahead because the majority of state delegations are in Democratic hands, and it is unlikely to change in November. All of this assumes that ME and NE don't split their electoral votes.

As you can see, Obama's road to the White House is much easier than McCain's. McCain's only hope is to try to peel off MI or possibly PA.

____________________

DelaneaD:

Flashlight:
The Diageo poll is completely projectable. Diageo (a spirits distributor) is merely the sponsor of the research. They are sponsoring the poll to get their name out there. The actual research is being conducted by a consulting firm. The important thing to look for it that it is a telephone survey that is nationally representative, which means results are generalizable to the US population. They are collecting close to 1000 interviews so the margin of error is pretty narrow (plus or minus 3%). The margin wouldnt improve much even if they collected 5000 interviews.

I personally have limited faith in IVR... think about what you would do if a computer called you. Only a certain type of person will entertain that call and participate... telephone with a live interviewer, on the other hand, is likely more reliable. IVR is cheap, which is why it is used, but inferior to telephone.

Net-net... the results of this poll are completely credible.

____________________

Basil:

Stillow,

saywhat is right. We didn't win WWII against the Axis. We helped the Russians, who were on the verge of winning by themselves.

We suffered 300,000 dead against the Axis in WWII. The Russians lost 6,000,000 dead, or 20 times more. Hitler was toast after the first winter.

US participation in WWII was significant and often heroic, but pales in comparison to Russian involvement.

When you look at the Iraqi death toll in Bush's Folly, it's appalling. 100,000+ dead (maybe many more). Why are so many U.S.soldiers committing suicide? Why are soldiers in Iraq contributing to Obama over McCain 6 to 1? Why are all those generals and admirals who supported Obama at the convention wrong?
Why will U.S. taxpayers (many of them Republicans who worry about taxes but get hard-ons for war) spend over a trillion dollars ($1,000,000,000,000, a THOUSAND BILLION) for this piece of crap war started by our piece of crap decider guy who belongs to a party that should be so ashamed of itself for this that its elected officials should all be doing community service for the rest of their lives (and I don't mean in congress or the White House)?
Huh?

____________________

thoughtful:

Good morning,
The new Hotline tracker poll is welcomed. I think its model might be a little skewed on the Dem side as Rasmussen seems to be on the Repub side.

So I guess real voter intention is somewhere in between. Not very scientific but there you are!

@Tom - you certainly have got the various scenarios wired. Gosh some of the battleground states are close - Kerry States + Va or Oh seem to be easiest pick ups, though McCain has really pushed Fl into play with the Palin selection. It really has pushed the Jewish community in particular Obama's way. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Obama +5 on the next Rasmussen Florida State poll.

As site regulars know I was of the opinion early on that NC was very much in play. The whole state is polarized between South and West and North and East. I think the military isalso split - this is probably the most divided and interesting State in the Union. Va is like that too!

With regards Palin, people vote for President not VP, she has rallied the base, I see her as breaking the "do no harm" rule. I suppose no press conferences or interviews for her adds to the mystque and notoriety/celebrity! Its the troopergate baggage, the bridge to nowhere lies etc that are going to bring her and thus McCain down. Let'see how the Convention bump
continues with today's polls.

____________________

Publius:

New Rasmussen daily has Obama up 49-46. What do you make of this?

____________________

thoughtful:

I hate spamming but this is truly significant

thoughtful:
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows Barack Obama attracting 46% of the vote while McCain earns 45%. When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 49%, McCain 46% (see recent daily results).

McCain's Rasmussen high water mark is 47%!

Stillow, my friend, your guys have got this bounce to +2 and it's gone! The McCain Speech - negative!

Not enough Americans are buying into the misrepresentations/lies and the absence of policies. The Republican ticket lacks credibility.

The trend is hugely bad - in fact could hardly be worse for McCain. It looks like Obama was leading in yesterday's polling by 5 points minimum. 50-45 by Monday!

Posted on September 6, 2008 9:59 AM

____________________

A.Marie:

Stillow:

The GOP has long held that it is the party that best handles the economy. The fact is, Democrats have a far better record, AND are the party of responsible economics. Look at the budget SURPLUS that Clinton left, and the HUGE DEFICIT that Bush will leave us with.

The Clinton boom was longer and more prosperous than the Reagan boom. And Clinton erased the deficit during his boom, while Reagan outrageously inflated the deficit during his. A Republican will tell you that the elimination of the deficit under Clinton was really the work of the Republican Congress, despite the fact that the budget bill that got the deficit work done was passed without a single Republican vote.

Democrats believe in the same brand of economics that Henry Ford did when he decided to pay his workers well enough so that they could afford to buy his cars. Pay the people good, decent wages and they'll buy things, thus generating a good economy.

And Democrats are good for jobs, too. The chart below (from American Assembler) shows the net job increases of all presidents for the past 80 years, since Coolidge. Job increases have always been better under Democrats and worse under Republicans -- the worst performance by a Democrat is better than the best performance by a Republican. And it is people with JOBS who keep our CONSUMER ECONOMY afloat.

Job Loss/Gain by President/Party
Roosevelt (D) +5.3
Johnson (D) +3.8
Carter (D) +3.1
Truman (D) +2.5
Clinton (D) +2.4
Kennedy (D) +2.3
Nixon (R) +2.2
Reagan (R) +2.1
Coolidge (R) +1.1
Ford (R) +1.1
Eisenhower (R) +0.9
GHW Bush (R) +0.6
GW Bush (R) -0.7 *
Hoover (R) -9.0

*The figure for the current Bush is from 2005 data, so it is MEASURABLY WORSE NOW.

That trickle-down theory hasn't been working so well, has it?? Why would you want more of the SAME?

You want a better job, better pay, better benefits and a sound economy overall? Probably shouldn't consider a vote for McCain.

____________________

Justin:

9/3 - 9/5

Rasmussen
Obama 49
McCain 46

Gallup
Obama 47
McCain 45

____________________

thoughtful:

Gallup tracker today 47-45

Polls a little all over the place - McCain had a big Friday with Gallup and a poor Friday with Rasmussen

"The first Gallup Poll Daily tracking report based on interviewing conducted entirely after McCain's speech (from Friday through Sunday) will be published on Monday. The test for McCain will be whether he can do more than return the race to the absolute tie seen at the beginning of the convention period, and actually lead Obama by a significant margin for the first time since late April/early May."

I think it's going to dip on Monday/Tuesday.

____________________



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