9/1-3/08; 734 RV, 4%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews
McCain 42, Obama 42
(8/31: Obama 48, McCain 40)
Interesting result! Sampling size looks small though. I think we need to wait until the weekend to see conventions' effects.
Posted on September 4, 2008 4:57 PM
No way this is right.
"there is no "present" button in the governors mansion or the white house".
Heard that nickname on Rush. You liberals should listen to Rush, you might learn something.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:00 PM
I always love how a poll like this will add in more undecideds than the previous poll.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:01 PM
You listen to Rush regularly and you want us to believe that you are a Democrat, voting Republican for the first time?
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:03 PM
A 8% shift in 3 days? I find that hard to believe.
Either the last poll was off or this poll is off I think, but I don't see how there would be that big a shift in so little time, especially given that I would assume that this doesn't include Palin's speech from last night.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:05 PM
Clearly an outlier compared to Rasmussen and Gallup being taken in the same sample period. That said, Nate at fivethirtyeight.com rates CBS as the worst pollster not to use a discredited methodology like Zogby Interactive of Columbus Dispatch. So take that with a grain of salt. 12% undecided is also very high for this - CBS is the only pollster pulling double digit undecideds at this point.
Interesting numbers, in other words, but it needs corroborating data to matter.
waiting for the internals, but, from the writeup -- it seems like CBS just overpolled Dems last time, and is underpolling them this time. It makes it seem like the race swung more than it actually did.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:10 PM
If I wanted to listen to a conservative journalist I would rather listen to someone like Scarborough who mostly seems to have very objective conservative views and less of an ideologue. I get really tired of fanatics like Glen Beck, Oriely, Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Ann Coulter. Heck I dislike the Liberal ones too like Franken, Olberman, et. al.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:11 PM
Did you hear Dennis Miller on O'Reilly yesterday? He was funny. He said that if he was Joe Biden, he would be getting that VP contract thing in writing. There might be something to what he is saying. I heard Rush Limbaugh say on Fox news this morning that Obama might be looking for an excuse to ditch Biden and then try to put Hillary or another woman on the ticket. I've had those same thoughts lately. This latest national poll could prompt Obama to make some unlikely moves.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:16 PM
It's kind of ridiculous that a poll can show a two point gain for one candidate and an 6 point loss for another over a period of just 3 days, and even if you give Palin credit for a big bounce, this was a three day sample, only the last one possibly covering some of the potential speech bounce.
So in reality, this would have been a reflection of a loss of Obama's bounce and not a McCain bounce. I do not tend to trust polls that show such wild swings without much reason. I do however generally trust that the results of the Pollster tracker are within 3 points of the real result, and likely underestimating Obama's results due to the house effects of Rasmussen and Gallup Daily Tracker.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:17 PM
I listen to Randi Rhodes....and I assure you I am no liberal!
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:18 PM
"You listen to Rush regularly and you want us to believe that you are a Democrat, voting Republican for the first time?"
About half of Rush's audience is Democrats....
You're on crack. That's what happens when you watch and listen to that stuff...you start believing the lies they say.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:19 PM
Do you have any links to a reliable source that states as much, or did you just hear him claim that?
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:21 PM
Don't worry libs, even I don't think the race is 42/42...I'm pretty sure Obama has a 5 point edge or so....now next week when the polls tighten....then these #'s will be valid....Palin helped the GOpand will get a bounce.
I said last week on this blog that if Palin delivered a knock out speech that don't be surprised if Biden suddenly gets sick and has to "drop out"............Obama is more nevous than a chicken at KFC.....these libs on here will deny it til they are blue i nthe face, but Palin connected with the base and with indy's....watch these #'s tighten up big next week if not even to a small McCain lead.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:22 PM
Player believes Rush is credible. From now on I am ignoring all player comments because we know what kind of person he is. (maybe now he'll link me to ayers)
A little comedy:
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:25 PM
I never touch the stuff. I don't even drink.
McCain was throwing a "Hail Mary" with the Palin pick?
No, when you throw a hail mary, you need to throw a football. McCain wandered off the field, to a nearby fruit market, picked up a kumquat and launched it two feet at a fire hydrant.
That is what the Palin pick was. The unexplainable action of a crazy person.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:26 PM
Sorry Robi, no chance of a link; Ayers has a PHD.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:27 PM
bramster - He's just an idiot. No drugs needed.
Anyhoo, this has to be the biggest PWNING .....EVER!
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:28 PM
I voted for Hillary in the primaries, Kerry before that, Gore before that. It's McCain-Palin this year because Obama is to scary.
I've always listened to Rush. He would not be number one and signing a 400 million dollar contract if he was not getting a lot of listeners.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:29 PM
Looks like CBS polled Utah excessively with this poll.....fools.
I can't wait til the Palin adultery story comes out! Yikes!!!
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:31 PM
This is certainly encouraging for McCain (especially since he hasn't give his acceptance speech yet and Palin's speech was just last night), but as others have stated, there's not much sense in looking at national polls until early next week. Then we'll know if either candidate really got a 'bounce' from their convention, and if so, how big. Whether you agree with her or like her or not, Palin's speech was brilliant and she did exactly what the McCain campaign needed her to do. She demonstrated to middle America that she's "one of them" and she will no doubt appeal to far more swing voters (i.e. white women, working class men, independents, Catholics, and sportsmen), especially in big industrial states like PA, OH, MI, more than any other running mate McCain could have selected. If McCain has a good, straightforward, impassioned speech tonight, I think the race will be tied next week. Then the Rev. Wright, Tony Rezko, William Ayers, "bitter", inexperience, and "Not ready on Day One or at 3AM" ads will start in all the swing states through Oct. And we'll see yet another Republican "patriot" get elected and yet another Democrat "elitist" (who had all the same demographics issues as Kerry, Gore, Dukakis, and McGovern) lose. Just watch. Hillary in 2012!
marctx joins the list.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:33 PM
I am not sure they care....and there is nothing wrong with getting all sides of an issue. I listen to Rush sometimes, but I also listen to Randi Rhodes, who if you do not know is a hard core leftist. I watch CNN, Fox and MSNBC....I like getting all perspectives....you guys who are o nthe left who automatically discount sources like Fox and Rush, really limit yourselves to one viewpoint. Which is in my opinion the reason you guys "cling" to your stances even when the argument is extremely weak. Your a lefty, diveristy is your thing right?
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:39 PM
As the Rasmussen and Gallup seemed to be building a consensus, here comes CBS to muddy the waters. And they are showing a 16% undecided number which is incredibly high for after Labor Day. I am a conspiracy theory guy and I think that these organizations are "manufacturing" results to keep it close. A 5 pt Obama lead with no discernible way for McCain to recover before the debates was starting to look like a death grip. I can't think that Palin did anything to move the poll because all of the negative stuff has already been thrown at Obama. Did she think she could outdo the visuals that have already been rolled out? She could fire up the base but they are already counted. As some of her more extreme views get out, she may actually become a drag. I could see Obama going negative with an attack on her and his age at the same time. That could be a killer.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:41 PM
I said that there would be a bump and it will continue until two or three weeks from now (the debate will really put things into motion)
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:43 PM
What is it with you guys? Palin is negative? Pointing out the other guys dopy stances on key issues is not negative.....I suppose Biden's speech where he slammed mccain every 30 seconds was a glorious display of positive and bi partisan mastery right? Or Obama's speech where he slammed Mccain every 20 seconds was a never before seen act of good will, positive thoughts and the ultimate in reaching out to the other side.
the more you guys open your mouths, the more stupid you look....its on a daily basis.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:47 PM
It is interesting that we rarely see McCain's numbers going up. I don't ever remember seeing a poll with him over 50%. He can drive down Obama's numbers with attacks like we saw last night. But those that change their minds stay in the undecided column. He cannot seem to bring them over to the Rep. side. I think that it is the economy. When the Reps try to focus on identity politics when the undecideds want to hear about the economy it causes distrust.
Maybe they don't trust Obama but that McCain 90% plus agreement in voting with Bush is a hurdle McCain can't get over. Obama should hammer that message home every chance he gets.
Well that didn't take long.......
We all knew that racists support the Republican party, and so were waiting for a racist comment. Well now, a repub congressman shows his true colors......
Georgia Republican Rep. Lynn Westmoreland used the racially-tinged term "uppity" to describe Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama Thursday.
Westmoreland was discussing vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin's speech with reporters outside the House chamber and was asked to compare her with Michelle Obama.
"Just from what little I’ve seen of her and Mr. Obama, Sen. Obama, they're a member of an elitist-class individual that thinks that they're uppity," Westmoreland said.
Asked to clarify that he used the word “uppity,” Westmoreland said, “Uppity, yeah.”
Other Democrats have charged that the Republican campaign to paint the Illinois senator as an “elitist” is racially charged, and accused them of using code words for “uppity” without using the word itself.
In August, Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-Nev.) told reporters, “When I hear the word ‘elitist’ linked with Barack Obama, to me, that is a code word for 'uppity.' I find it extremely offensive and John McCain should know better.”
Political consultant David Gergen, who has worked in both Republican and Democratic White Houses, said on ABC’s "This Week" that “As a native of the south, I can tell you, when you see this Charlton Heston ad, 'The One,' that's code for, 'He's uppity, he ought to stay in his place.' Everybody gets that who is from a Southern background.”
The Obama campaign, asked about the quote, did not note any racial context.
“Sounds like Rep. Westmoreland should be careful throwing stones from his candidate's eight glass houses,” said Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor.
Campaigning against the first black major-party nominee has already created some problems for Republicans.
Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said that Obama's middle name – Hussein – is relevant to the public discourse surrounding his candidacy, saying in March that if Obama were elected, "Then the radical Islamists, the al Qaeda, the radical Islamists and their supporters, will be dancing in the streets in greater numbers than they did on Sept. 11 because they will declare victory in this War on Terror."
At an April 12 event in his district, Kentucky Rep. Geoff Davis (R) said of Obama: “I’m going to tell you something: That boy’s finger does not need to be on the button. He could not make a decision in that simulation that related to a nuclear threat to this country.”
Davis sent a letter of apology to Obama in which he described his remark as a “poor choice of words.”
Westmoreland originally supported former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney for the Republican presidential nomination. He now supports McCain, but missed an August fundraiser for the nominee because he was vacationing with his family.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:48 PM
I watch fox from time to time but never rush.
Rush is a sad excuse for a human being who flat out makes the most outrageous comments and obscene comments about whatever comes his way.
He's not a political analyst, he's an entertainer and I'm not going to give him my support. He has no credibility and anyone who thinks so...well...you can probably finish that sentence.
There are many, many more. This isn't about getting all view points. That would be like asking me to listen to the KKK rally for all viewpoints.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:51 PM
Stillow - you are such a ignoramus. Palin lied repeatedly about Obama and her own record. Are you really that effing stupid?????
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:53 PM
It's not that Palin's speech was negative (at least for me). It was that she was blatantly lying about Obama being bipartisan. But then again, I seem to be responding to the Rush groupies.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:55 PM
Of course my comment about her lying is now completely overshadowed by Brutus doing what he does best:
Calling people names...
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:57 PM
Although CBS does not make this easy to figure out, the composition of the sample by party ID in the WEIGHTED results of this poll (see the very bottom of each poll's report) is significantly different from the one released Monday and may be enough to explain the change in results. By my reckoning it was about 26%R, 35%D, 38.5% indie the first time and 31%R, 35%D and 34%I this time. I did a very quick-and-dirty calculation and invite the serious-minded poll junkies here to double-check my work.
Posted on September 4, 2008 5:58 PM
Man, you guys are a hoot, all of you. Let's be real. Obama is up by 5. CBS has an over/under polling issue between the last two polls. Palin hit a homerun with the base that is sure to spur on the Obama supporters even more, and based on some conversations I had and heard today, people in the middle didn't like her. I don't know what McBush was thinking, but no one wants a Hockey Mom to run the country. Just realize that I had to actually type that. IT MAKES NO SENSE. The Independents get that. The big key, as someone pointed out, is that it doesn't matter what poll you look at or what Obama's number is...McBush never gets over 42/43 percent. When I hear that "Obama never gets over 50 percent," I have to just laugh. This thing will end 52/47/1 (for the third parties). Obama will take 311 electoral votes. The Republican party will have to figure out if it wants to be about Bible thumpers or Moderates for 2012 and beyond. End. Of. Story.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:01 PM
She did not lie....she had some spin on his record to make it look less favorable....isn't that what politicans do? Obama and Biden aere out doing the same thing....go look at Biden's speech, not only did he attack, but did it well. Ya gotta start looking at these things in the big picture and not thru a microscope. The left get sall upset about attacking there side.....when they do the exact same thing....its called politics.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:02 PM
Obama has no record of bipartisanship?
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:05 PM
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:06 PM
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:10 PM
btw poll talk:
16 point undecided is really interesting this time of the campaign.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:14 PM
Senator Lugar of Iowa is a Republican is he not? Did He and Obama not enact Legislation with regards to Nucleur Proliferation and organize a round up of loose Nukes in the Former Soviet Union?
I think you are going find Secretary of State Colin Powell Republican and Senator Chuck Hagel Republican endorse Obama once this Convention is over!
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:15 PM
All that stuff about Obama raising taxes was a lie. Obama will lower taxes on 95% of the public. The Reps need to be called on that.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:16 PM
You can tell Obama is nervous because now he's flipping like a pancake on issues that might tick off his base....he's out there now saying the sruge was a huge success....where he told Katie while overseas it was not and even on that day he would not have supported.....the guy flips better than Kerry could ever dream of. All that we need now is for him to come and and support offshore drilling.....i'd bet a shave and a haircut he will end up supporting it before the debates.........
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:17 PM
To be fair, Palin said he would raise taxes, she didn't say for who. That is spin so fine whatever. Mislead the public.
Stillow stay on point.
Are you telling me Obama has no record of bipartisanship?
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:18 PM
I agree. This appears to be an outlier ...
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:19 PM
That is "income taxes" only. He is rasing capital gains taxes....faaaaaaar more than 5% of us own investments. He is raising the payroll taxes, which of cours eis not only a tax on you, but also the business you work for............your a lefty, you know how many different taxes you pay.....its not just income taxes............and by letting the bush tax cuts expire, the child tax credit gets reduced by half, in effect thats a tax increase from what they get now.......so don't feed me the 95% thing.....it doesn't fly....and people know it.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:20 PM
thanks for answering my question (NOT).
Don't talk to me about flipping. You really want to go there?
Maybe btw Obama actually has CONCEDED a point and says that the surge is working. Although I haven't heard him say that and he's probably talking about the Suni awakening.
But if you want to talk about flip flop. McCain is KING.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:21 PM
stillow - No wonder you like Palin - she is a liar - just like you.
For a nervous guy he didn't show em in his O'reilly interview which I have seen the some of. He's moved more to the centre.
You know I like watching Fox so I know what the other guys are thinking.
+2 to -6
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:22 PM
seriously, dont talk about flip flopping. thats a debate you will DEFINITELY lose. McCain has been god awful...there was a time when he was VERY popular with both inds. and libs.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:23 PM
I used to support McCain. Hell, I was gonna vote for him two years ago until I discovered how awful he is now and how great Obama is.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:26 PM
actually, i can't believe you even mentioned flip flopping....grrrr. You were gaining some credibility in my book stillow..then you said that and showed everyone here that you are either BLIND or a HUGE hypocrite.
Agreed and thinking that Rush is anything near a valid political analyst is just plain wrong.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:28 PM
They need an instant messaging form of this so we can see responses right away. I hate this reloading lag time thing
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:31 PM
New Howey-Gauge Poll of Indiana John McCain 45-43 Barrack Obama just published tonight Aug29-30 4.1 moe
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:36 PM
Indiana state poll?
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:38 PM
Uhhh, ya mccain flopped before, but the fact obama is doing it "now" show's he thinks he needs to tune up......espeically on that issue.
I'll bet ya guys money he flips on oil drilling.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:43 PM
On oil drilling really?
Obama will not CAMPAIGN on oil drilling. He might sign bills that have part of the action be for oil drilling but Obama will never say:
"DRILL HERE DRILL NOW!"
Once again, listen to what Obama attributes the surge to. It's not just the increase in troops that helped the region. This is the problem, people don't look into issues enough. Look up the role Suni leaders had to help with the surge. Obama attributes a part of the success to that while McCain doesn't.
You think that Obama has NO record of bipartisanship in the senate?
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:48 PM
nah, he wont, guarantee it. Not after he told over 40 million people a week ago that it was a stop-gap measure that will only result in even more dependence on outdated fossil fuels (talk about dependence). Hes absolutely right...we need to FIX the problem with a solution..not with another problem.
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:50 PM
The MOE (4%) handles the sampling size issue. The pollster noted "The race between Barack Obama and John McCain is now even, 42% to 42%. In polling conducted last weekend, the Obama-Biden ticket led McCain-Palin by EIGHT points."
Bounce? Of course.
Popular vote wins elections? I think not.
Pollster Electoral count:
260 OB-179 MP
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:52 PM
Yes Robi Indiana but the timing of this poll is at the end of Dem Convention and the Palin announcement
Difficult for McCain to shine to night!
Listening to these commentators on Fox its like Stillow is in the room!
Posted on September 4, 2008 6:53 PM
it amazes me how many tools on this board can't even read a poll. when you weight your sample differently, yes fools, the results change. Go look at the party id of their last poll and compare it to this one. Notice anything? yeah, run along now......
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:09 PM
Strange poll. While party id can change, for it to go from (26R 35D 39I) to (31R 35D 34I) in three days, especially just after the democratic convention, seems a bit odd. Does anyone know if CBS weighs for party id?
Also, despite Obama's backing among previous Clinton supporters going up by 11 points (58% to 69%) Obama's support among all democrats fell by 4 points. Strange.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:11 PM
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:18 PM
Definitely a strange poll result. No other poll is this close. Oh well, after 9/15 and the convention dust settles I think the polling data will be more meaningful. Right now it's changing by the hour.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:20 PM
Ms. Palin should be a bit careful when denigrating 'community organizers'. Those words might come back to bite her in the posterior.
I don't think many Christians would like for Jesus of Nazareth, Saint Paul and Saint Peter to be denigrated. You could call them community organizers, as they organized the early Christian communities in the Roman Empire.
I don't think many Christians and Jews would like for Moses and Aaron to be denigrated. You could call them community organizers, as they organized the Israelite community under the Pharaohs, then led that community out of Egypt.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:23 PM
Good God guys, it really is a ticket of Dumb and Dumber.
Check this out:
So let's see here, we have one guy who finishes 894 out of 899 in his class, while his trophy VP pick finished her BA in 6 years from 5 colleges and her grades won't be released. Her degree is from the University of Idaho (which for those of you scoring at home, is the size of a decent junior college). Yikes.
Biden graduated in 4 years from the University of Delaware and received his JD from Syracuse. Then you have Obama, who went to Columbia and then Harvard and graduated Magna Cum Laude. Yeah, what an elitist! What a smarty pants, uppity snob. Who does he think he is?
So to reiterate, we have two people with highly suspect education credentials on one side and two people who have graduate degrees on the other. HMMMMM.
What do 42% of the good people of this nation say?
"Yup, we want the dumb ones running the country!!"
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:25 PM
Only Rasmussen weights by party ID (otherwise the party ID would have hardly changed in this poll). Polls like this weight by demographics (age, sex, and geography).
I would possibly credit the clearly odd results to the fact that the first day of this poll was Labor Day. It makes no sense to poll during holidays, as if polling mid-convention makes a lot of sense.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:27 PM
mike in md wrote:
"Ms. Palin should be a bit careful when denigrating 'community organizers'. Those words might come back to bite her in the posterior.
I don't think many Christians would like for Jesus of Nazareth, Saint Paul and Saint Peter to be denigrated. You could call them community organizers, as they organized the early Christian communities in the Roman Empire.
wow, that's a stretch.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:28 PM
That is a stretch but the job of a community organizer is hard and it sounds easy by title but it really isn't. I'm not saying being a community organizer=qualifications for being president or VP, but I am saying that her blatant attack at a very admirable job that is hard to do for little pay isn't exactly respectable.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:32 PM
Yeah, like being a part-time mayor of a city of 5,000 is some kind of primer for the VP role. Someone needs to beat her down publicly - I'm thinking Hillary.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:34 PM
The National Enquirer (I know) is reporting that Palin had an affair a few years back.....
Well, they did break the Edwards baby mama drama.
In other real news, Palin might need to hire some more lawyers.
The GOP candidate for vice president, Gov. Sarah Palin, may be facing yet another ethics investigation back in her home state of Alaska. An ethics complaint obtained by NBC News was filed Wednesday by the police officers union in Alaska, requesting a probe into possible wrongdoing by the governor or her office. It was brought on behalf of state trooper Mike Wooten, an ex-brother-in-law of Palin who is at the center of the "Troopergate" scandal.
The complaint alleges that the governor or her staff may have have improperly disclosed information from Wooten's personnel records. The complaint alleges "criminal penalties may apply."
John Cyr, director of the union that filed the complaint, told NBC News, "It seems obvious to us somebody has improperly accessed [Wooten's] personnel file."
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:37 PM
Palin fired up the Democratic base for sure.
It has been quoted that the Obama campaign raised $8 million since her speech last night from over 130,000 donors - on pace to hit $10 million by the time John McCain hits the stage tonight.
I see this as somewhat of a confirmation that there was minimal cross-over appeal to the rhetoric of Palin's speech. If this fires up Obama supporters to this extent, it suggests that it was broadly seen as the type of politics that Democrats generally reject far more often than Republicans do. I would imagine that swing voters that don't respond to baseless rhetoric will have a similar reaction.
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:38 PM
I was one of the Obama donors. 25$ baby!
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:39 PM
Yup, that is what should scare the living daylights out of repubs. Obama didn't even really try to get that, people just saw him being lied about and attacked unfairly and donated - in the words of tricky dick - BIG TIME!
Guess what would happen if he really tried to get all his supporters to donate?
If he got $10 mill in 24 hours......wow....
Posted on September 4, 2008 7:48 PM
the Obama thing isn't live?
I'm already skeptical.
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:01 PM
@Brutus1/TheVoice99 and every other ID that you have used that has been banned.
Read me carefully. If you really care about your candidate, you will cut out the extreme leftist loony crap that you post, cross-post and then post again.
Simply put, just like Palin enrages the left, you enrage the right, and just like Palin distances the middle from her, you distance the middle from your views.
What you do, and how you do it is damaging to your cause.
Use your sense and be rational. Being a screaming lunatic doesn't work. Get a f$&king clue!
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:04 PM
Anybody know how many people watch the debates on average?
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:07 PM
How long is the interview with Obama going to be?
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:10 PM
community organizers is a resume item for bored college students who don't want a real job.
I didn't mean that as any insult to you... it's just my experience
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:14 PM
Not really but whatever you say. When you hear about what he has tried to do and has done in Chicago as an community organizer, it is moving and he has used that experience as how to change government from the ground up (yes that is part of a campaign stance).
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:16 PM
He wrote his first book as a response to people asking him to write a book because he was the first black president of the harvard law review. It's not a campaign book cause it was written in 1995 and it is a wonderful book and tells a lot about him and his life thus far.
A part in the book that was very revealing to me was the community organizing part and that's why I feel strongly about it.
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:19 PM
I'm watching the O'reilly factor (for the first time in a LONG time and now I remember why) and the bastard is milking the interview over the week. I don't want to have to watch this show more than once...****...
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:26 PM
Cutting people off and talking over them doesn't make you more right. This has always been O'Reilly's style.
Obama handled him well though. This interview being segmented into mini interviews is stupid.
Posted on September 4, 2008 8:49 PM
Actually, the AP has reported "Palin switched colleges 6 times in 6 years."
1. An "iffy" at University of Hawaii at Hilo. I do not even know why they included it since there is no record. Note: Sarah graduated HS in 1982 after she helped her team win the Alaska small-school basketball championship
2. Fall 1982 Hawaii Pacific University, Honolulu HI
3. Spring 1983/Fall 1983 North Idaho College, Couer d'Alene ID
*Interlude-- In 1984, Palin won the Miss Wasilla Pageant, then finished second in the Miss Alaska pageant.... and she won a college scholarship!!!
4. Fall 1984/Spring 1985 University of Idaho, Moscow ID
5. Fall 1985 Matanuska-Susitna College, Palmer AK
6. Spring 1986, Fall 1986, Spring 1987 University of Idaho
I see she attended 9 semesters in five years missing only the Spring semester 1984 (Miss Alaska?). The typical four-year degree requires 8 semesters.
What's the big deal? Why was this presented as a problem? (Keith Olbermann announced it as breaking news on MSNBC.)
P.S. University of Idaho can hardly be equated to a junior college. UI is a land-grant college (established 1889) when Idaho was still a territory. And because it is a land-grant, UI has a large campus.
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:02 PM
Let me be on the record to say:
MSNBC is liberal I know.
I don't care about this story either.
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:06 PM
Guys, I just wonder, Did you notice the difference in party ID between the poll taken over the weekend by CBS and today's poll by CBS?
Here it is:
Poll over the weekend:
*Weighted/743 Registered Voters
Guys...can we do the Math please? 31% + 41% + 45% = 117%. Is that even possible? This poll gives Obama, the democratic nominee an edge of 10% of party ID, in addition of extra 17% of the Independent voters, who in this poll preferred him.
*Weigthed/691 Registered Voters:
All of a sudden, CBS gives the democrats a 4% party ID, a 6% decrease in just a couple of days. In addition of having a total of 100% instead of 117% in the other poll.
Bottom line: I think they are trying to manipulate the numbers so they can make the horse race as tight as they want, overnight if it pleases them. If the want to make Obama look good, the only thing they need to do is poll more Democrats. If they want to make Obama look bad, the only thing they have to do is reduce the number of democrats.
Do you think that it is pure coincidence that Obama went down from 48% to 42%, a 6% loss when the party ID gap was reduced by 6% from the previous poll. This poll had a 6% reduction in democratic representation, and the democratic nominee lost 6% of support. Do you think that it is a coincidence? Well, time will tell.
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:09 PM
The fact that the over the weekend poll had a total of 117% is really odd.
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:12 PM
What's going on in here? I'm getting bored with the convention. Poor McCain, he's not going to be able to rock the house like Super Sarah. He put himself in a pickle with his selection. The old guys Biden and McCain will probably get 20s ratings, while the rockstars got 30s ratings.
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:17 PM
Barack Obama is too liberal oriented to understand the use of power. When he said that he would never ever use nuclear weapons regardless of the reason, I knew that I could never vote for him. When you make irresponsible comments like that, you invite disaster. An example; a country like Iran could send someone over here with a backpack nuke and possible kill hundreds of thousands of people. They wouldn't fear a nuclear response from an Obama admin. They would definitely use a nuke on Israel if they didn't fear nuke destruction from the US.You have to have someone in the oval office that has the temperament to pull the nuke trigger should there be a need. The main job of the president isn't pushing social programs. The office was created to have someone to preside over defense and deal with foreign countries. Its right there in the constitution.
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:18 PM
My turning point was his saying he didn't support the war when everybody else did, Biden, Clinton included. I know he didn't have a crystal ball to magically know how it was going to turn out. I think he is just a radical anti-war nut that is ideologically unable to defend this country.
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:33 PM
Welcome to the Fox News forum!
Posted on September 4, 2008 9:46 PM
Who are you? You just appeared on this site a few days ago. We've been posting here since January. I personally supported Hillary since then and now McCain.
Your Rush and Fox News hatred is not in the mainstream because Rush and Fox News are #1.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:00 PM
Player: We will never be nuked by Iran. Ever. You know why? The only reason these 3rd world countries create nuclear weapons is so that they get noticed - and [ideally] involved - by other countries. They want to be involved economically with first-world countries like the U.S. That being said, they don't want the U.S. to invade them and destroy whatever government they have set up. My point is, if they actually USED the nuclear weapons, they would never be politically accepted by first-world countries, and therefore would not be able to trade with them. If they nuked the sh*t out of us, the U.S. would never agree to allowing trade between our countries. You must think over WHY they want nuclear power before you just assume that they want to do nothing except kill thousands of people for the heck of it. I know that this is a bad system, but nuking them will not make them respond in a good way. This is just going to provoke said nuclear attack.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:02 PM
Barack Obama seems to harbor the radical spirit of the 60s. This is the Bill Ayers view.That view hates patriotism. Ayes has said himself that he believes in communism. Obama and I are both from the same generation. Ayers was born in 1944.Obama was a political science major. He has studied the constitution and most or all of its articles. He also went to grad school and majored in constitution law. He knows what the Constitution is about. He knows what the office of the president is for yet he goes out and down plays the success of the troops in Iraq, won't visit them in the hospital because cameras aren't allowed, makes irresponsible comments, and is more or less disdainful of troops sacrifice. He may not think so but he seems to play by Bill Ayers playbook and so inspires the radical left liberals of this country.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:07 PM
Haha, so you're basically unable to come up with any substance so you say that Obama is a communist and unpatriotic. Wow, I think America just had an aneurysm.
By the way, Fox is NOT number 1. Sorry to disappoint ya folks -
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:13 PM
Yea, and a little guy like Hitler who was let out of jail by the liberals will never try to take over the world. Who got fooled there? We have nukes and we will use them if need be. We used them in Japan. The world knows this. You show any signs of weakness in this world and they will eat you alive. The left has got this liberal idealism that they are living in a perfect world. The left needs a little touch of reality to see the dangers. It looks like 911 didn't wake them up.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:14 PM
Looks like 911 didn't wake you up either - when the Bush Administration went to war in a country (Iraq) that was completely unrelated to the attacks on the WTCs. In my opinion, if we were to attack anyone, it should've been on the guys who attacked us, who were in AFGHANISTAN, not Iraq.
By the way, in case you didn't know, when we bombed Japan, Japan had no nukes. So they couldn't nuke us back, so to speak.
Don't quite know what that first sentence is supposed to mean - please rewrite it. It sounds like you're saying that Hitler was jailed by liberal Americans and then tried to take over the world.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:24 PM
I don't know how anybody who thinks Rush or Fox News is credible is a dem but ok.
They are flat out liars and it only takes a couple of minutes of research to find that out.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:33 PM
I fought in a war. By the way, which way did Barack Obama vote on the Iraq war resolution?
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:34 PM
You seem to have Fox News on the brain. Are they keeping you up late at night? Its best to let it go.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:41 PM
I can agree with Robi that I didn't buy into Rush and Fox News talking points before this election, but I still watched to see what the enemy was saying. But this year, I watched MSNBC and CNN bash and trash my candidate Hillary Clinton and found myself agreeing with them more often then not. The devil, Chris Matthews argued with Pat B. tonight about his new found love of women's rights. Well, the treatment of Hillary by the media and the DNC this year is going to cost you the election.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:49 PM
Oh so because you fought in a war, that makes you the master nuclear warfare tactician. Right...
And to answer your question, he was against it from the start. He in fact addressed an anti-war rally.
As I backed up earlier, he was right - we should have put our forces in Afghanistan to find Bin Laden, instead of going to Iraq, where Bin Laden (considered resposible for 911) obviously was not present.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:50 PM
They worry me because they do have a huge base and they say whatever will benefit the Republican party.
MSNBC is their counterpart but it's not nearly as watched as fox. Plus I haven't seen as many absolute contradictions or lies about facts at MSNBC than fox.
CNN is a balance between the two because their reporting is the middle ground and they rarely stand for nonsense from either campaign.
FOX calls anything left of it the "liberal media" but that's like saying anybody left of Hitler is a communist. It's simply not true. It's a tactic to discredit everything else. I read many different view points and from time to time watch FOX to know what the reps are saying that week but it's obvious to me that they ignore a lot of prevalent facts in the race and in events in general.
I used to watch FOX when I was younger, now I know better. It's just the result of being informed on the facts and the backround of situations. Not as a product of the liberal media as they would want you to believe. If you want examples I'll give them to you. Just ask.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:51 PM
And to think I used to enjoy reading the posts on this forum (A few of you are exempt from what I am about to say). Do any of you guys really buy the bs you're selling on either side of the political spectrum... seriously... fox news said.. Keith Olbermann said... watch this you tube video... this website is worst than the national enquirer.
Lots of you have PHD's in here or higher education of some kind, I enjoyed when you used all that higher education to disseminate the polls and provide useful insight by race gender demographic. Would be nice if we talked about the candidates with constructive criticisms not just the sensationalism of the day. Im not against the barbs once in a while... but this website has denigrated into tabloid central
NEWSFLASH: everyone in here for the most part has already selected the candidate that they will vote for... no-one is convincing anyone else!!!
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:52 PM
Why did you vote for Hillary?
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:55 PM
I'm not going to say "They started it". But I will say that the youtube videos that I posted point out hypocrisy at its highest. That is the only reason for my video posts because it is absolute evidence of the FOX NEWS and BILL O hypocrisy that people here buy so easily.
I would love to get into a serious debate about issues but it is hard when people call facts "liberal propoganda".
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:57 PM
Cuz she shared my policy views AND my values. Obama shares my policy views, maybe. I think he's lying. But he does not share my values.
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:58 PM
Posted on September 4, 2008 10:59 PM
Ho-hum. 'Nuff said.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:05 PM
Values is why Hillary won OH, PA, KY, WV. We don't cling to our religion and guns out of bitterness. We don't go to churches that damn America. We don't love this country for the first time because Obama was nominated. I love this country. God Bless America.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:07 PM
No, fighting in a war, lets one see and live reality. As far as Obama's vote goes, you know that he didn't have a vote on the Iraq war resolution because he wasn't in the US Congress at that time. However, he cleverly introduced the concept in the mainstream that he voted against the war. All of these liberal columnists use it. Its a lie , and he lets it live.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:10 PM
Really....where to begin....I don't care anymore
Your inability to even understand what Obama meant is evidence enough your part of the stubborn minority who don't care. That's fine, but just don't hide behind patriotism to do it.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:14 PM
Obama never suggested that he voted in congress and I want you to show me a speech he gave or a paper he released saying so.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:15 PM
If you want to talk about smart issues or polling numbers, I'll be over here staying away from the toxic issues.
I'm done with the non-issues.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:18 PM
So by fighting in a war you should get the basic instinct that immense massacre is not pleasurable. Invading countries that we have no personal involvement in (i.e. Iraq) involves massacre (i.e. bombings.) Provoking a nuclear attack on Iran (see my previous posts), therefore, is also not preferable.
And again, making up things when you don't have facts to back it up. Tsk, tsk, tsk... you should have learned from your past claims. Give me one credible source that says Obama voted against the war or that he was in the U.S. senate at the time of the vote.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:19 PM
I want to apologise to you for all the partisan posts I have made on this website. John McCain and you have convinced me how wrong I have been. In the spirit of togetherness let's all get together and sing Kumbaya along with Joan Baez.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:21 PM
I really wish there was a "present" button in the White House...maybe George W. Bush might have been able to push it every now and then when he wasn't on vacation (more so than any president).
Seriously though, the present vote has a direct correlation to the fact that you are voting with a crowd, and not deciding. Thus the oft-overlooked (even by Palin) difference (maybe if she had taught constitutional law she would also realize the difference).
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:25 PM
I'm sure if Obama is elected he will install a present button and un-install the nuke button and replace it with a bong.
I don't know what you mean and don't care, but the reality is millions of Americans don't hide behind patriotism but instead rejoice in it. The 30%, 50%, 20%, now maybe only 12% of the Reagan democrats will vote McCain. Obama might still win, but Sarah-cuda Pitbull Palin is going to turn out the vote to stop the biggest mistake in American history.
Don't hope for a better America, vote for it.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:30 PM
anyway i read the eye in the storm piece and I think it's really good. What do other people think?
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:32 PM
You are confused. Patriotism isn't something you can hide behind. It isn't a symbolic banner of some type. It is something that you have to feel. Some people like those that serve in the military have more of it than most. A person that would die for his or hers country without questions are patriots.Those who don't feel it can't show it.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:37 PM
"anyway i read the eye in the storm piece and I think it's really good."
Can you give me the link?
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:43 PM
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:51 PM
very interesting comments. Have you ever heard this saying?
"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel."
I agree that it's too early to tell.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:52 PM
And that will always was and always will be the case.
I have never seen a politician that enjoys the support of the mainstream attack another politician's patriotism. It's always the other way around.
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:54 PM
And here's patriotism in action...and under disguise:
Posted on September 4, 2008 11:58 PM
"And if the real thing don't do the trick,
you had better make up something quick
you gonna burn, burn, burn, burn to the wick,
ooh, Barracuda! Oh yeah"
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:00 AM
Obama will eat McCain alive in debates. If I were him, I'd send a bulldog with lipstick to debate Obama. McCain is overshadowed by Palin in RNC. Too bad for him.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:08 AM
McCain is going to Saddleback Obama in the debates, but you're right...Palin would cream Obama. This is Barracuda Palin's convention.
FYI - Rush said tonight that Obama is going to drop Biden from the ticket. He might be able to save his chances without Biden.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:12 AM
Rumor Mill at work: Psst. Is Obama going to drop Biden from the ticket? Don't know? Who is he going to replace him with? Not Hillary thats for sure. Probably that Kansas governor. Whats her name again? Has she been a mayor of a small town? We'll show them.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:15 AM
Yes I have. I think that it would apply to Bill Ayers and his radical organization. You know; I love my country so much that I will bomb it and kill its citizens in order to save it from itself. That sort of thing.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:19 AM
There are 4000+ dead marines and soldiers that would not have died if Gore had become president. Not only that Gore would have listened to Richard Clarke and quite possibly there never would have been a 9/11. Condi Rice gave al-Qaida low priority even after being warned. This is Clarke talking about how Clinton thought of al-qaida-
"there were people in the administration who were very seized with this issue, beginning with the president. ... It is very rare in my experience when the president of the United States picks an issue after his administration has begun, because the world has changed, and says, this is a priority, guys. ... If 9/11 hadn't happened, I think historians could go back and look at what the Clinton administration did ... and say, 'boy, were those guys overreacting.'"
Your adoration of Bush and McCain is not patriotism, it's BS!
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:38 AM
"history has annointed to save my country in his hour of need"-mccain
if obama would have said something like republicans would be calling him arrogant and presumptious.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:45 AM
"history has annointed me to save my country in its hour of need"-mccain
The party ID on this poll is way out of whack. I think they undersampled Is and oversampled Rs. From what I understand, the Ds have a 10% party identification edge. Also of note is that McCain seems to be stuck in the low 40s. He's been wobbling between 41% and 44% every day except 3 since July 4 (it was 40% all three days, and all before July 17), while Obama's number has been between 43% and 46% until August 28, and has either been 47% and 48% since. Since Rasmusses weights party ID, this would tend to supress a convention bounce, and I understand that they even tightened the partison weights towards the Republicans recently.
Gallop has also showed McCain with a bit of a ceiling. He hasn't been able to sustain any numbers above 44% since the end of the primary season back at the beginning of June, while Obama has maintained numbers in the 45%-48% range with only occasional breakouts. When Obama has broken out, the McCain campaign has been able to counterattack effectively. After Obama opened up a lead after the Berlin event, McCain started the "celebrety" attack, which pulled the race back to even. Obama then opened up a slight lead at the beginning of the Olympics, but McCain launched the "drilling" attack to bring the race down to tied at the beginning of the convention. I suspect that we will start to see the race tighten as the Republican convention bounce comes into play, although it should be worth noting that at this point in the Democratic convention, Obama was well into receiving his bounce. Obama's bounce appears to have been from the Clinton backers coming home (it began about the time of Hillary Clinton's speech), while McCain's bounce may be limited because the Republican base fell in line behind him back in July. Also, it should be worth noting that Obama seems to do better in the Monday and Tuesday interviews while McCain does better in the interviews over the weekend. Its weird, but worth noting. I predict that when the dust settles, McCain's bounce will be a relatively small one, with Obama having about a 3%-5% lead come Monday.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:48 AM
But wasn't that McCain's next line anyway?
Sorry, couldn't resist.
I was not very offended by McCain's speech, I was more so underwhelmed. It was however exactly what I expected. The speech was so underwhelming to me that I couldn't even follow the words, and yet I was interested in hearing them. It was nothing more than an old guy reading off a teleprompter.
The people in the crowd on the other hand do scare me. These people would follow a kindergartner to the gates of Hell with chants of "USA, USA, USA", if that was who their nominee was. Stillow, Player and MarcTX probably had goosebumps watching this with their blank open-eyed stares. It's so easy to get these types riled up.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:56 AM
Live with reality. You say if Gore had of been president. You can't look at things like that. You have no idea what Al Gore would have done. He might have used nukes himself. As for the democrats caring about the dead soldiers in Iraq, forget it. They use this as a pawn. The democrats, Obama and Biden included, wanted to cut off funds for our troops. These talking liberal pundit media asses have done everything they can to demonized the troops. They don't have a clue what military duty is about. They make all of their phony hero movies raking in millions and then they try to turn people who don't know any better on the establishment. They did the same thing to us when I was in Vietnam. Bill Ayers was a major catalyst of it. It wouldn't bother me one bit to see him do the rest of his life behind bars.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:08 AM
"Palin would cream Obama" in debates
Are you kidding? She doesn't even have any policies. She does not even know what a vice president does. And her greatest foreign policy asset is that her state is close to Russia.
C'mom, get real...and McCain has a LOT of good experience and good knowledge of issues (except economics, according to him) but he's too old to even put together back to back coherent sentences without stumbling over his words.
Anyone see Tom Ridge accidentally call McCain "Joe Bush?" lol.
oops "john Bush"
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:09 AM
get real. the republican have said a thousand time if gore would have won our country would have been destroyed by terrorist. but you are right we dont know what might of happened if gore was president.but we do know what happened when bush was president for soon to be 8 years. and we also know what mccain is going to do. he is not a change agent.he is trying to steal someone elses campaign. he is promoting the same issues that bush pushed except for climate change. so thats not a maverick thats a follower.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:23 AM
"As for the democrats caring about the dead soldiers in Iraq, forget it."
This is really STUPID. Why do you think we are angry, Dr. Einstein? Those marines and soldiers are our sons, brothers, and husbands too. Or do you think that all servicemen are Republicans? Biden has a son, Capt. Beau Biden, that is going to Iraq this year. You think Joe Biden doesn't care about the troops? This is like arguing with a donkey. YOUR AN IDIOT! And I want you to know that I say that with all due respect!
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:29 AM
is that all the republicans can got to. if we dont agree with you we are anti-american. if we see things differently we are not patriotic.ike zotz we all have people who are involved in this war. my brother just came back from iraq. i am proud of my brother and my father military service. i only disagree with how their service is used. i love my country but it is not perfect.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:36 AM
Indiana Just Got Tight:
Obama 43, McCain 45
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:41 AM
Your friends brought up patriotism. I didn't. Somehow you are believing a lot of bull from the liberal media think tank. I'm not a republican. I am a conservative democrat. I will be an independent by next election. I don't believe in hard core republicanism. I have a business degree. Most people that have business degrees are conservative minded. I know about patriotism because I served my country in a time of war just like your dad did. No one lives in a perfect world unless they have bigoted views. I listened to the democrats hatred views of Bush and their hatred views of the troops in Iraq until I got sick of it. I watched the Obama campaign exploit racism and use disgusting tactics against a woman opponent. Now he thinks hes the messiah in a messianic movement. He thinks its all about him. That in itself is a danger to this country. How can you stand to listen to the president being demoralized at every turn by these elitists if you love your country? You can stay in it if you want. I don't want anything more to do with it.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:50 AM
Your loud mouthed blow hearted name calling will get you no where with me. It just shows your ignorance and immaturity. You are so blinded by the extreme left homosexual elite of the democrat party that you foolishly believe everything they say to you. Its either that or you are one of them.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:05 AM
How bout them polls?
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:06 AM
I think this is a microcosm of what happens in politics. People get bogged down in small arbitrary and childish issues like "who loves their country more" and we don't actually debate real issues.
We name call (which I have done and I'm sorry for now upon reflection) and act immature and it gets us nowhere.
I now understand why Illinoiside is so frustrated.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:11 AM
thats hard to do when someone use baselss attacks. this is what is sad about american politics. there is no bipartisanship.mccain and obama can say what they want.but the truth is neither has truly been bipartisan. in his 26 year as a politician how many time has mccain truly been a maverick.his maverick stance came in 2000. only in 8 years in his entire political career. and even then he has voted for the party more than not. obama has not been bipartisan either except for a dew times. but his career is not vast enough to really know if he would ever cross party lines. to take a few instances(mccain and obama both)of bipartisanship as who you reallly are is dishonest. lastly if mccain was going to change washington why hasnt he done so. the lobbyist are still there.the loophole are still there. and he is still there. he has had 26 years to do it .and all he did was change some of the rules for campaign reform. and he wasnt the first person to want campaign reform.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:20 AM
I'm sorry I lost my temper. I probably shouldn't talk to you at all but I am here to fight Bushism in all its forms. But I should not lose my temper. Some kinds of conservatives I do respect. Few people know it but Barry Goldwater supported abortion rights because it had to do with individual freedom.
Andrew Sullivan is a conservative I respect
"I'm sure conservatism will one day recover - because it is right about the main issues: government needs to be kept in its place, taxes should be low and budgets balanced, individuals should be able to pursue their dreams as free of government control as possible, families do matter and need to be free from government interference, free markets and enterprise are the only guarantees of prosperity, moral choices - and their consequences - should be faced by the individual responsibly, and we have to be strong in our defense and prudent in foreign policy. This is the conservatism I still believe in. Deep down, I'm sure McCain does too. But it will only come from the ashes of this fundamentalist, mean-spirited, parochial, arrogant, big-spending, irresponsible shambles of a party. We have to repudiate the party of Rove and Abramoff and Romney and Dobson and Cheney and Bush II.
Burn it down and start over."
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:27 AM
McCain was a maverick UNTIL 2000. I believe after he lost his primary to a further right candidate (Bush), he lost it and was obsessed with appeasing the very same people he once opposed so much.
That's why I liked him until a couple of years ago.
Obama does have a small voting record to put him in a statistic and I think one has to go on his policies.
I look at the campaigns this way:
Apparently people believe all politicians lie so we can't hold one more accountable than the other. (I don't really believe all of them lie but I will concede the argument for the sake of moving on).
What we have to do is then judge them on their policies. In other words, if one was promising the end of the world and the other was promising the salvation of the world, wouldn't you want to vote for the guy saying he's gonna save the world? (I am not implying who is who)
So forget who people think is trustworthy or not, that is more in play during the primaries when political views are more similar.
It's about voting the policies that one thinks is best. That's why it's upsetting that people diverge so much off topic and that's why we had Bush for another 4 years.
Personally I trust Obama but I don't want to debate that cause of what I said just now.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:29 AM
OK everybody group hug
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:30 AM
and the thing about earning someones trust.mr.mccain,how can you do that when you have lied about your opponent at every turn. when you had negative ad after negative ad on tv since obamas return from overseas.you have questioned his patriotism and dared to say with a smile he would rather lose a war to win a election.no you have not earned my trust. you could have if you had kept your word. but you didnt.your campaign is a karl rove clone. question everything and answer nothing. no solution from you.just insults. my country is being destroyed by the divisive politics of karl rove and you think you can fix it. but yet you are using the same gameplan the same memebers of his staff. i pray to God you do not win. you have no honor, no respect, and most importantly none my trust. i used to like you mr. mccain.would have voted for you once bu no longer. i dont hate you but i no longer can respect you. may God save america from the person you have become. a cold cruel liar who has lost honor he once held as a soldier and pow. in God i trust and God alone.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:35 AM
How am I supposed to rally my party if I say that I agree with Obama all the time?
I can't give them a comprehensive plan at my rallies. My rallies are about defeating the democrats, not understanding every single issue.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:37 AM
He probably wouldn't say that...
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:38 AM
Ok let me try
you can disagree without lying abotu someone. you can say we both are going to lower taxes but my tax plan involves lowering taxes for all incomes. you can say i dont agree with him on iraq, i believe the war in iraq is not over and we need to win.you can say we both love our coutnry but i just believe we see things differently in how to make this country better. not he wants to lose the war to win an election. you might as well say he wants to betray our country for personal gain.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:43 AM
I'll be the same maverick I was in 2000. Let me in office and I'll make sure that every side is heard. I needed my base but, now that I have them, I will be the John McCain of 2000. The one you all have known and loved.
(That's all I can do. He really lost credibility with me too and I can't find any argument that I can't argue back better)
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:44 AM
I feel betrayed as well by him. My best case scenario for him is to kick out Palin, get in Joe (although he's on the **** list right now) and say to the Reps. "**** you I'm in charge and I'm gonna run this baby like it should have been run back in 2000". That's if he wins of course which electoral polling doesn't show in his favor at all.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:47 AM
my father used to always say if you want to tell on someone tell on yourself. see my father knew that when i told on my siblings i was basically trying to cover up the fact that i was an sccomplice in it all. that is what politicians do. they tell on the other candidate instead of jsut speaking of their own issues to distract you from their own dirty behavior.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:48 AM
oh well mccain will probably win the election now becuase people love phony acts of bipartisanship and compassionate conservatism
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:50 AM
Don't lose all hope just yet. Look at the map on the homepage and remember that Obama needs only 10 out of the 99 remaining toss up votes and he's leading in Ohio and VA. New polling a couple of weeks after the convention will give us more info.
Posted on September 5, 2008 2:52 AM
i havent lost hope in obama, i ve lost hope in people.they are going to once again reward the republicans with 4 more years of bush/cheney.
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:03 AM
i dont think they get the fact that mccain is not going to bring change.because that wasnt the campaign he was running before.
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:09 AM
I agree that the US population is pretty ill-informed. It's actually pretty sickening the utter lack of information they have. I still think that we can pull through because the grass roots campaign (that I am part of in Ohio) has every day people, not professionals, going to their neighbor's doors and talking about it.
We bring it up in conversation and there is more of an impact because we can make a connection because they know we are sincere. I don't think the McCain campaign has anything that grass-roots like on his side. My small group believes we can do this and, being in Ohio, we are excited in making history!
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:13 AM
I think that you will find on Monday/Tuesday next week in the trackers at best MCain is -3% on Obama and at worse - 11%.
Palin is a liability and he looked even older tonight and no one in the middle is going to believe him after the Palin pick and the negatives.
I personally can't see McCain winning the more than the a small majority of the undecided/indies and that only gets him to -3% nationally.
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:17 AM
I really don't like national polls.
GIVE ME STATE POLLS! (I'm very impatient)
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:21 AM
I like the individual states much better too.
They do tend to lag a bit behind the National, I don't know why that is.
Ohio is the crucial state particularly as Iowa looks to be firmly in the bag.Mid West, West Battle with the bonus of Virginia and north Carolina and Florida still in play>
On the current National poll repeated across the US would give Obama over 300 EV, Gets some Sleep!
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:34 AM
chris matthews who is informed thinks mccain wil be leading the polls next week.now if he bleives it want chance do the ill informed have.
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:49 AM
Chris is making a prediction that I made a couple days ago. It's a convention bounce. As much as I don't like McCain, he's gonna have a bounce. When it comes to actual polls and election predictions, I don't put my beliefs in there.
There will be a bounce and McCain will lead in the national polls for a week. Then Obama will probably resume a 2-3 point lead until the debate when god knows what happens.
State polls will be very interesting though.
Posted on September 5, 2008 3:58 AM
Robi and all,
Just as this poll is an outlier.
You will soon enough today get a better feel for what size of bounce.
In fact there is great fun to be had in comparing the Hillary bump at the Dem convention to the Palin one at the Repub convention. I know that some of the polsters here are even cleverer than I in extrapolating from the trackers yesterday's single day polling numbers!
The Gallup and Rasmusson(due at 09.30)trackers are good measurement monitors(even with the latest R weighting adjustment in the Ras)giving us a pattern. We should get a clearer picture, of any polling effect,if any, of Palin's speech and the Convention etc.today. A word of caution the Gallup always shows a slightly worse Obama number on Friday and week ends. I don't know whether we can factor that in?
I am of the opinion that on Monday, unless something sensational happens we will know with a degree of certainty what the Republican Convention bounce is say +2% or Dip is say -6% .
I don't think with last night's football McCain's speech would have been that dynamic as far as the Polls go, in the positive, but I am bias because of the ageism in the electorate that I think has been making it very difficult for McCain to poll much over 45%.
Posted on September 5, 2008 5:35 AM
Guys obviously this CBS poll has been manipulated to make the race close. Did you notice that the poll over the weekend had a party ID gap of 10% in favor of the democrats? Did you notice that this poll has a 4% party ID gap in favor of the democrats? In the poll over the weekend Obama 48% support, this poll is Obama 42% support, Do you notice the coincidence in Obama dropping 6% support from the poll over the weekend and the 6% loss in party ID?
*Let's not even go to the 117% in the poll over the weekend, 31% Rep.+ 41% Dem.+ 45% Ind= 117%. Who is that?
The daily tracking polls should reflect the movements in the electorate. Remember that after a couple of days, especially after the first debate, no one will remember the convention speeches. However, the movements in the electorate right now, will tell us what groups are "movable" for McCain. We will have the chance to identify who could be sensible to McCain. I think that both campaign will be glad to identify those groups.
Posted on September 5, 2008 7:44 AM
40+ million watch Palin speech.
RASMUSSEN: Palin More Popular Than Obama or McCain... Developing...
TV VIEWERS FOR PALIN, 10 PM ET
MSNBC 3,277,000 (Olderman & Matthews need to find new work)
Posted on September 5, 2008 8:51 AM
Bob Woodward has a new book coming out that says that better intelligence gathering and high-tech spying were the real reason for the partial overcoming of the insurrection in Iraq more so than the surge, looks like McCain was not only wrong about the war, he was wrong about the surge too.
Posted on September 5, 2008 8:55 AM
In the WP today Charles Krauthammer calls Palin a "wing-nut"! Am I still dreaming?
Posted on September 5, 2008 9:05 AM
Mark maybe the GOP should change the top of their ticket. Obama's favorability ratings.
08/23 - 08/24
08/21 - 08/23
ABC News/Wash Post
08/19 - 08/22
Posted on September 5, 2008 9:10 AM
McCain better hope for a bounce today from Palin's speach because his last night was god awful.
Posted on September 5, 2008 9:11 AM
Great NYT editorial-
"Thursday night, Americans mainly saw the old John McCain. He spoke in a moving way about the horrors he endured in Vietnam. He talked with quiet civility about fighting corruption. He said the Republicans “had lost the trust” of the American people and promised to regain it. He decried “the constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving” problems.
But there were also chilling glimpses of the new John McCain, who questioned the patriotism of his opponents as the “me first, country second” crowd and threw out a list of false claims about Barack Obama’s record, saying, for example, that Mr. Obama opposed nuclear power. There was no mention of immigration reform or global warming, Mr. McCain’s signature issues before he decided to veer right to win the nomination.
In the end, we couldn’t explain the huge difference between the John McCain of Thursday night and the one who ran such an angry and derisive campaign and convention — other than to conclude that he has decided he can have it both ways. He can talk loftily of bipartisanship and allow his team to savage his opponent.
What makes that so vexing — and so cynical — is that this is precisely how Mr. Bush destroyed Mr. McCain’s candidacy in the 2000 primaries, with the help of the Karl Rovian team that now runs Mr. McCain’s campaign.
Posted on September 5, 2008 9:32 AM
I’ve been a democrat for a while and want change in Washington more than anyone, but I got to admit I have some serious concerns with Obama. As an economist/engineer, I have to agree with Romney if we want a strong economy we need an environment that will let the businesses in America operate more efficiently without the government tying their hands. Obama’s tax plan will be disastrous to the job market as history has shown in the past. I see over-regulation causing businesses to close all the time. I had to close a business myself and layoff 8 employees. We need to examine the issues closer. I really believe the McCain/Palin ticket will significantly improve things in Washington and they have a record of doing so in the past. This just is not the time to risk our country with someone who in some 47 years never demonstrated he can change anything in a positive way. Obama is a wonderful speaker but his job will affect our future for years. My 401Ks have taken a nose dive ever since we got control of the Senate and House a year of two ago. Out of curiousity I researched the fact and discovered that democrats on average have actually voted with Bush over 90% of the time, so I think our argument of 4 more of the same just doesn’t hold water. I’m changing my vote to republican at least for this term and going with someone I can trust has the people of America first, not someone who has some very disturbing terrorist ties. I’ve come to admit that McCain and Palin are the better choice this year and plan to back them in this election.
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:16 AM
Very strange Ras tracker on Real Clear 48 Obama 46 McCain
Rasmussen site not updated yet!
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:24 AM
It's up now: Well for Rasmussen: 46/45 & with leans 48/46 Obama/McCain.
So it is a Palin Bounce!
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:33 AM
Yesterday, I said that I suspect that Rasmussen will eventually put McCain 1point ahead. So there is more to come. I think that Gallup tracking will eventually show some movement in favor of McCain, but I doubt it will pass 45% or 46% of support. In Gallup tracking poll McCain seems kind of stuck there. Let's wait guys!!!
*Time will tell.
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:36 AM
Giving tax breaks to corporations and deregulation will make businesses better! Is it what you are saying? This is exactly what Bush did last 8 years and look where we are now.
Let's see your logic. Obama is a senator so he does not know real issues because the Congress does not deal with executive side. However, Democrats in control of the Congress are responsible for the executive mistakes. Are you sure you are an economist?
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:40 AM
"As an economist/engineer, I have to agree with Romney if we want a strong economy we need an environment that will let the businesses in America operate more efficiently without the government tying their hands."
Romney on business, that's a hoot.
as if he ever made money "making" anything
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:54 AM
Dem Convert is a McCain operative,as sure as I got it wrong on the Palin effect.
I feel genuinely sick, as McCain had a big day polling yesterday Obama losses 1 and McCain gains 2! Stillow when sghe gets out of her Nevada bed is going to be Ya Yaing me. Boskop, Player and Marctx will pile in for good measure. Its going to be unbearable.
Game is definitely on!
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:58 AM
Part of me feels a little happy for Palin, why? Well, this assures that Hillary will never be president. You all know, or should known by now, that I have a little bit of a problems with those feminist from the 60's, the baby boomer girls. Look, if McCain is elected in Nov., Ms. Palin will be Vice-President of the United States, at least for 4 years, in case McCain doesn't run again. Do you have any doubts that Palin will not take advantage of the opportunity to look and act presidential? Um...YES SHE WILL!!!!
In the case that Hillary gets the nomination in 2012, a BIG IF, Ms. Palin will be a formidable opponent, why? Woman vs. Woman, Senator vs. Acting Vice-President, Conservative, gun touting, bible loving, mom-warrior, hockey mom, vs. the Senator from the great State of New York. And don't forget: Youth, good looks, rock star, good speaker vs. old, non-good looking, far from a rock star, and not that great of a speaker. I am not even taking into account all those "I-hate-Hillary" voters. WOW!!!! That's going to be hell of a ride. Against Hillary, I'm with Palin.
Posted on September 5, 2008 10:59 AM
Considering the Rasmussen poll only includes one night after Palin speech and nothing after the McCain speech, I am impressed not just with the beginning of their bounce but also with the favorable ratings:
"Both Obama and McCain are now viewed favorably by 57% of the nation’s voters (see trends). However, Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is viewed favorably by 58%--a point more than either Presidential hopeful. Forty percent (40%) have a Very Favorable opinion of her."
I have a suspicion that part of Palin's favorable rating increase is the reaction to the piling on by Obamanation and media. (Similar to how Clinton's popularity increased during the impeachment frenzy of the GOP and media.) Americans tend to take the side of the person targeted by bullies.
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:06 AM
Republicans are very happy because they found the tool to "beat the b..ch" in 2012. Ms. Palin has given Republicans the possibility of not only winning in Nov. but winning in 2012 against Hillary. They know that Hillary is waiting for 2012, now Republicans are getting Sarah Palin ready for 2012 as well.
Any bets guys? Vice-president Sarah Palin vs. Sen. of New York Hillary Clinton!!! I'm with Sarah in that match.
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:12 AM
Why is "rock star" on your list for winning the Presidency? If so, I choose still hot Tina Turner and for VP Arrowsmith's Steve Tyler as my preferred candidates.
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:14 AM
I really hate the "b-word" and women who use it against other women makes themselves sound like the b-word.
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:19 AM
The reality is that people love popular people. Do you think that Republicans will be that hopeful if Sarah Palin's presence and speech had fallen flat? I don't think so. According to what I've seen and heard, Sarah Palin is the new star of the Republican party.
Good for them, and good for America. Sarah will not only be helpful in this election, but in 2012 against Hillary.
I've told you that I live in Miami, and I can testify that people, especially men, are crazy about her. This is just a fact in life guys: Young people, better looking people, especially if they know how to speak graciously, can go a very long way. Too bad for Hillary that she waited so long to being president, and now that she is there, the first female president made her nationwide appeareance. Again, the young, good-looking chick trashes the dreams of the old, non-good-looking woman. Didn't Bill also went "nuts" for a young chick as well? So, who is going to blame Americans for going crazy about Sarah!!
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:24 AM
I used the "how are we going to beat the b..ch," based on a question a McCain supporter asked him back in January during his campaign in New Hampshire. See? I am talking about Republicans, so I used the same description I heard from a Republican about Hillary.
*I think she is disgusting but nothing else :-)
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:27 AM
Gerard Baker writes:
"The best line I heard about Sarah Palin during the frenzied orgy of chauvinist condescension and gutter-crawling journalistic intrusion that greeted her nomination for vice-president a week ago came from a correspondent who knows a thing or two about Alaska.
“What's the difference between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama?”
“One is a well turned-out, good-looking, and let's be honest, pretty sexy piece of eye-candy.
“The other kills her own food.”
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:33 AM
If a country is talking about a VP candidate's sexiness rather than the record high unemployment, then we are all screwed.
6.1% unemployment guys! Why didn't Bush tax cuts and deregulation help corporations to create jobs? Isn't it what we were promised?
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:44 AM
There is no way Hillary can match Sarah Barracuda at the end in 2012. After 4 years of being a very active vice-president, she will pass the commander in chief and the experience thresshold with flying colors. Sarah will be 48 years of age and Hillary will be 65 years old. Have you seen Sarah's husband? He is a very good looking guy :-)
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:46 AM
Not yet. We still haven't seen the full Palin influence. We'll need to wait til early next week to see how it really played....but I told you part of her appeal now is the media backlash, the way they and the far left treated her is going to prove to be simply unacceptable to the people. Everyone on here thought I was crazy. But she has the ability to connect...and when a politician can do that, some of there baggage which they all ahve is less burdensome.
I think early to mid next week McCain will be ahead in soe of the daily trackers.
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:50 AM
Sorry SwingVoter but this is the buzz in my town at least. Yesterday, in the radio, FM for goodness sake!!, the shows were all over Sarah Palin's good-looks. I really doubt that she would have made the same impression if she had being Ms. Kay H., the senator of Texas. I really believe that she is the perfect disgused tool for the GOP: new, fresh, pretty, and young in the outside, but very conservative, old rightwing agenda in the inside.
*You don't want to know about the song that a couple of radio hosts, here in Miami, composed for Sarah. The song had something to do with Viagra!!!
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:53 AM
We are now seeing the unfolding of the Rep smear campaign. I am sure all of them will attempt to portray themselves as "Dem Converts". I researched the so-called Obama- Ayers connection.
They served on a charity board together, Woods Fund of Chicago. That is a grant foundation, not a left-wing organization. They appeared together to discuss juvenile justice on a 1997 panel sponsored by the University of Chicago, records show. They appeared again in 2002 at an academic panel co-sponsored by the Chicago Public Library.
Obama joined the Woods Fund of Chicago in 1993 and stepped down in 2002, three years after Ayers was appointed. The board met four times a year to discuss policy and new grant proposals. In the mid-1990s, when Obama was running for the Illinois Senate, Ayers introduced Obama during a political event at his home, according to Obama’s aides. Ayers, a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, later contributed $200 to Obama’s state campaign.
That's it, the evidence that Obama is sympathetic to terrorists. So what Obama did wrong was not resign in protest when this man joined the Woods Fund of Chicago, six years after Obama became a member. Ayers, an activist in Chicago politics, sponsored a politial event at his home that Obama attended when he was running for the Illinois Senate.
I cannot anywhere in this find where Obama shows sympathy with Ayers radical views. In poitics, you have to meet people involved in the community in order to get elected. Not all of them are good people.
John McCain met with and accepted the endorcement of John Hagee who has referred to the Roman Catholic Church as "the great whore" and called it a "false cult system" and "the apostate church". According to the reasoning they are applying to Obama doesn't this mean that McCain feels sympathy for Hagee's views on the Catholic Church?
It doesn't matter that McCain later denounced Hagee's statements, remember Obama also denounced Ayers. So if they say Obama is sympathetic to terrorists they should admit that McCain hates the Catholic Church since he never would have accepted his endorcement had he felt otherwise.
Posted on September 5, 2008 11:59 AM
Hillary needed McCain to pick a non-trascendential VP. You know, your regular white guy, the weaker the better, so she could be back in 2012 ready to make history. Now, it seems that it will be Sarah making history this Nov. and then again in 2012!!!
Isn't life ironic guys: Hillary fought for years to become the first woman with a real shot at the White House. She entered a fierce campaign that let her exhausted and with $10M less in her bank account. Hillary energized and galvanized millions of women accros the nation; she laid the ground for Sarah Palin's to come and raid her coattails. Hillary has being fighting for women for years, taking heat and hits, being humiliated at a national stage, and now, all the way from Alaska, a former beauty queen comes to mainland to being "annoited" by McCain to make history. What do you think Monica Lewinsky is thinking about all this? Again, a young chick gets in Hillary's way.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:07 PM
Did you even read the joke? It's about Palin being all American country girl and Obama is the princess.
Did anyone ever see Northern Exposure. I think that is what it was called. The star was a moose.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:09 PM
Not gonna work Carl. I know what you're doing.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:12 PM
Ms. Palin's culture is a plus, just like her good looks man. Haven't you noticed that she is good-looking? Didn't you know that she was Miss Alaska runnerup in 1984?
"In 1984, Palin won the Miss Wasilla Pageant, then finished second in the Miss Alaska pageant."
She is the perfect picture, an athletic, outdoors woman, with beautiful looks and youth. Can that get any better? Hard to imagine!!
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:14 PM
All correct Carl, but I know you are an Obama supporter so what's you're angle. I get the whole try to piss off us Hillary supporters because Palin is stilling Hillary's thunder, but what's with the acknowledgment of Palin's appeal?
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:25 PM
stilling? what's that mean...haha.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:29 PM
I'm just stating the reality: Hillary needed McCain to have a weak VP, so she could comeback in 2012 and beat him, supposing the VP was a guy. With Palin's pick, McCain is inheriting the GOP their nominee for 2012, to face off Hillary, woman vs. woman. Do you think that the GOP has not taken this into account? Do you know what are the chances of a Vice-president to be elected president?
When Obama picked Biden, one of the first comments I heard from taking heads in CNN was that it was good news for Hillary that Obama had picked a 65 year old guy, so she will keep her position for 2012 in the primaries. Now, don't you think that Sarah Palin is position herself to run for president in 2012 after serving as VP? You bet she knows what she'll be doing in 2012.
Posted on September 5, 2008 12:37 PM
Good news for Ellen, Oprah refuses to interview Palin. Oprah's ratings to fall even more???
In other entertainment news, Tina Fey will have to come back to SNL to play Palin. In my opinion.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:00 PM
I totally agree that Tina Fey will be perfect. She and Palin kind of look alike to me.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:03 PM
As lovely as Hillary is, so will go the way of Algore and that other guy that ran in 2004. She'll win a Nobel, though.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:09 PM
Oprah will take a hit. Its quite clear now that all the women's groups out there aren't really women's groups....they are liberal womens groups. Just add Oprah to the coming media backlash.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:18 PM
Cindy was just awesome last night. Obviously not the polished speaker that Obama is, but as authentic as can be. I had no idea that she had done so much in her lifetime to help innocent victims around the world--all without the cameras following her every move. I wonder if Oprah would consider having her on the show?
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:23 PM
I heard something different about McCain's POW story last night. It takes a courageous man to admit that he had been broken. This resonates with men and women.
Posted on September 5, 2008 1:30 PM
Wake up America! A red neck creationist with no significant education and an angry, likely demented old man (594th in the class of 599) to lead the country in the most crucial moment in the history? How about a professor of constitutional law as a candidate? Did McCain signed an anti-american confession while in prison?
Posted on September 6, 2008 12:38 AM
if they broke him doesnt that mean he told them information. doesnt that mean he betrayed his country.thats not courageous. if kerry has said that in 2004 you have wanted him hung for treason.
Posted on September 6, 2008 1:11 AM
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)
Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.
Please email us to report offensive comments.
See our comment policy here. Note that we require commenters to share their email address via Typekey. We will never share your email address with anyone without your explicit permission.
MAP - US, AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, WY, PR