Pollster.com

Lol.

And NBC is the first poll to come out with Obama ahead. Sorry, that's just amusing.

NBC - the #1 Network completely and utterly in the pocket of the Obama Camp.

I would LOVE to see the party affiliation sample they used on this steaming pile.

boomshak

yea right the WSJ is a real liberal rag isnt it

Not surprisingly, this poll chooses NOT to disclose the sampling by party affiliation. I am sure because they would be embarrased if we knew.

I am guessing 12 to 15 point sampling edge given to Democrats.

Bottom line, when they don't tell you the sample, it's because they don't want you to know.

@ boomshak:

I guess you didn't notice that this is actually a Wall Street Journal poll too... that liberal bastion eh?

maddie,

Yes the WSJ is extremely liberal, where have you been?

First poll out without the Saturday sample which is still keeping Gallup's number's afloat. Saturday was actually a national mobilization day for the Obama campaign. During the day canvassers and phone bankers worked nation wide. May have had an effect in removing certain demos from the sample; namely those most enthusiastic for Obama. mcCain appears to have peaked on Saturday.

Prediction: Tomorrow Obama retakes the lead in Rasmussen and brings Gallup to a 2% deficit.

For instance, this poll claims that only 34% of McCain supporters are excited to be voting for him.

That is a complete contradiction of every other poll out there.

My question is, why don't they let us know the sample? Why?

boomshak - are you on crack or just an effing retard?

This poll is considered the "gold standard" by pollsters. If you don't know the facts, STFU. Too bad it doesn't play into your mccain/palin bs meme.

Folks, it's NBC.

What else needs to be said?

P.S., Rasmussen is still giving dems a 7.5 sampling advantage in his poll based upon 2 month old numbers. He refuses (for some reason) to take into account the huge shift towards Republican Party Affiliation witnessed since the selection of Sarah Palin.

I used to admire Rasmussen, but his polling technique using 2 month old numbers is just bad polling.

Brutus,

If its the "gold standard", why don't the divulge their sample?

Besides, Gallup is the gold standard, not friggin NBC.

Boomshak-
Do we have ANOTHER hysterical poster with you?
Rasmussen had the candidates tied today. Is Rasmussen also "utterly in the pocket of the Obama Camp"?

Take a tranquilizer and GET A GRIP!

@Hope Reborn: I agree with your prediction, but I'm not sure about a 3 point drop in Gallup.

zotz,

Rasmussen is giving Democrats a 7.5 point sampling advantage in his polling nased upon 2 month old party affiliation numbers. If you actually understood polls you would know that and question why he is doing so.

Want proof this poll is biased to Obama? Check out the following question from the poll:

"Please tell me how closely you believe John McCain would follow and support George W. Bush's programs and policies if elected president––very closely, somewhat closely, not too closely, or not closely at all."

Huh? What kind of question is THAT to ask?

Where is the question: "Do you think Obama will continue to vote 96% of the time with the far left as he has done for his entire career?"

Steaming pile of bogus.

I can just see it now....a supertight race...coming down to one or two states, massive lawsuits (thanks al gore), lots of recounts...this has 2000 written all over it again. Hanging, dangling, dimpled, pimpled......its gonna be a mess. And when its all over the losing side will claim they were cheated.......and the country will move forward divided 50/50, again.

Stop arguing over who may (or may not) be ahead by 1 or 2 points! Folks, it's basically a (statistical) TIE right right now and unless there's a "bombshell" or "October surprise" on either side, neither ticket is likely to really "pull ahead" (i.e. outside the +/- margin of error) until at least Oct. We have Sarah Palin's national interviews, 4 debates, and alot of advertising (much of it very "dirty", no doubt) to come. And it's quite likely we won't even know who's going to win on Election Day. Remember 2004? It looked like Kerry was going to win OH and PA (and the presidency). Remember 2000? It looked like Bush was going to win (the popular vote and electorally - he didn't ACTUALLY win either). Yes, Obama SHOULD be way ahead. But he's not. So calm down and see whether he implodes or surges or (more likely) either 'squeaks out' a victory, or narrowly loses (by OH).

Boomshak your ability to not even look at the cross tabs to call out the bias of this polling team makes you nothing more than biased noise yourself in the blog-o-sphere.

Drudge has a link to more personal attacks on Palin....I have to ask the qeustion, how stupid are you dems out there? Have you not realized that personally attacking palin is backfiring and actually helping mccain? I know its a speicalty of the left to assasinate character, but Palin is proving to be to big a catch for you guys....yet you keep doing it. Its like I am watching the Dems just jump on to the bbq pit, one after another thinking there's ice in there.....

@Stillow
If you get your news from Drudge, that discredits you...except that you have repeatedly discredited yourself in the past with bigoted, racist, and otherwise loony statements.

To nitpick this poll only because of its supreme swing (not as an Obama supporter ;p) The sampling populations of Raleigh, Charlotte, and South and Coast doesn't give much creedence to the more liberal areas of the state like Greensboro, Chapel Hill, and Asheville. Although McCain only was 4 points ahead last month using the same methodology I could only wonder what sort of opening for error could exist for a state that has many different cultural hubs. I think this is the reason Virgina has been polling more consistently

Stillow actually thinks that it's the left that is good at assassinating character?

Obama nation, 527 ayers ad (I found out that Obama has asked all liberal 527s not to use TV ads), Obama's a muslim attacks, Rush, Hannity, Karl...need I say more?

Sarah Palin is a creationist that prays for pipelines and is for abstinence-only education. That isn't a smear, that's a fact. Dem bloggers who are stupid like Hope on this forum are not institutions like the swift boaters.

whoops wrong poll to comment on ;p

wow, this poll gave me some relief, i'm scared of that crazy witch palin she is a major extremist- denies global warming, denies abortion for rape and incest victims- that is crazy

I didn't mean hope btw I meant change.

The fact that you group news articles you found on Drudge Report and Liberals together makes me really think you believe everything Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee tell you. The media is its own beast and criticize it all you want but dont' lump it in the category of Democrats because there are more than enough people with many different political dispositions in the country to not classify themselves as a traditionally defined "liberal" or "conservative" for that matter.

Make the boogey-man all you like but many people can be "independent" and attack Palin's credentials or "libertarian" for that matter.

@brambster

Those comments coming from you are quite funny....you keep telling me your ignroing me, so stop talkign to me for cryin out loud....please go live in your leftist utopia and let the rest of us talk.

Stillow-
You are saying that Obama has not been personally attacked. Calling him "uppity" is not personal? Questioning his patriotism is not personal? Calling him elitist is not personal? This election has been one giant swift boat smear campaign by your side against Obama and now you are saying do not criticise Palin?

We have got to the point where the Reps are saying that the election IS NOT ABOUT THE ISSUES! Sorry, but if we catch McCain-Palin in a lie we are going to say something. We may lose but we will fight all the way.

Churchill said that a country that goes down fighting can come back but if it just surrenders then it's finished.

@Robi

Your ignorance is bliss my misguided freind. The statements you just wrote are exactly the reason you'll lose......you can only convince people of that nonsense for so long...but you get brownie points for trying so hard.

to stillow,

what about the right? they lied us into war, ran our economy into the ground, committed torture,- remember the right ran both the house and the presidency for a while- and our nation is in a complete mess

p.s as for the poll WSJ- is not biased in favor of the left- the race is really getting tied up again!

And what 527 ads are we putting up?

Polling sample data is in the complete report. A link to the pdf version is in the WSJ report.

That is a very good joke about the liberal WSJ. I got a good laugh with that one.

@zotz:

No that is not what I am saying, McCain, Obama and Biden hav elal been personally attacked. Because they all deserve it....the problem with personally attacking Palin now, is because early on the left and media went after her kids, which is a huage no no in politics to go after kids. What that did is give her a level of immunity against future personal attacks.....bashing on her daughter like the left and media did now sets it up for any attacks, legit or not, will be put in there "there they go again' catagory. Have have the oppositte affect. Your side commited one of the biggest tatical errors I have ever seen in politics when you brought up the daughter for a whole week and baby conspiracies, etc.....you have given her anti venom......and now Obama will dig his own grave by perosnally attacking her.

Sure enough here are the Reps doing what they said they wanted to do which was not making this campaign about the issues.

@Robi

Its not me, its a fact. Your side brought her kids into it and started talking about secret babies early on......by doing that future personal attacks are less hurtful to her and will cause a backlash.....your side started it it with nasty attacks on her kids.....its gonna backfire....obama intensifying the personal attacks now shows a level of desperation....however, because of the kids early on, it will no longer work. had the left not gone nuts and slam her daughter, obama's perosnal attacks today owudl be effective.

Stillow-
"and now Obama will dig his own grave by perosnally attacking her."

Give me an example of Obama personally attacking her.

woah boomshak. where did you come from, jeepers! Did you crawl out from under the same rock that Cheney's been hiding under?

Props to CNN with no Caferty and David Gregory with Republicans giving there side. Big change for more unbiased coverage. The big thing I heard was the 12 point sing in white women from Obama to McCain after the Palin pick in this poll.

Cafferty's wife is dead you prick

@zotz

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPd4yk0x-eg

going home now.

apparently your dc lexicon needs brushing up stillow.

Pig=pork

get it or are you trying to hard to misinterpret something?

Well well well liberal folks ... All that excitement from your failed convention is getting you all attahed to a one point advantadge on a National Barack Corporation (NBC)poll ... Tsk tsk tsk ... Reckon your failure and start bowing to your new president John McCain .. Prepare yourselves for the ultimate failure in what is supposed to be a Democrtaic year --

Yeah....WSJ was part of it too...this is a fact that eludes a lot of hopeless conservatives apparently.

Prick? I obviously didn't know that Robi. I'm sorry to hear that. But I stick by my complements that I see more of an effort to be unbiased.

He's not gone for good (I personally think he likes to be grumpy about anything) but I think a little respect for him would be nice. He's not a horrible person.

Stillow...Let's get the history correct here. It was Palin herself that exposed that her daughter was pregnant. She could have released her prenatal and birth records, but no...she decided to expose her daughter to public scrutiny. SHE exploited her daughters pregnancy to turn back long-running
accusations that she wasn't the mother of Trig.

And the rumors about Palin NOT being pregnant were floating around in Alaska...and being used by REPUBLICAN rivals...long before she was even discussed as a credible VP candidate. Part of that was because she herself kept her pregnancy almost completely concealed from those around her.

It wasn't liberal or Democratic blogs talking this up...it was her own party. They started attacking her because she was hurting their chances for the Senate and House seats.

The Democratic candidates up there were hands off on these "baby" rumors...simply because Palin wasn't helping Stevens and Thomas at all...like she once did.

I need to get a little clearer about what's going on.

This national poll may not be very relevant in this tight race, in which electoral votes only will matter.

It is now clear that, within a margin of error, and without anything dramatic happening, this race will be decided with less than 5% between the two candidates, and very possibly less than 2.5%. Our electoral system cannot handle these small differentials very well.

That's why we read that Obama is about to campaign in Nebraska, where he might get one or two electors in Omaha.

This election could easily come down to one or two electors.

There is also a problem implicit in the safe harbor provisions of vote certification (again!).

The problem is that absentee ballots, many of which are manually counted, may not all be countable by the dates for certification in every state.

This election will likely be decided on a hair trigger.

And, it is not at all that that hair trigger applies to a level playing field.

Obama's words had NOTHING to do with "pork."

Associated Press...."You can put lipstick on a pig," he (Obama) said to an outbreak of laughter, shouts and raucous applause from his audience, clearly drawing a connection to Palin's joke. "It's still a pig."

The McCain campaign called on Obama to apologize for calling Palin a pig. Obama's campaign said he wasn't referring to Palin; he had been talking about McCain immediately before the lipstick comment.

So then Obama called McCain a "pig" and that is supposed to be OK?

I am going with the first interpretation that got the Obama crowd going, because it is so similar to the many remarks that Obama made about Hillary.

Wow, just think about the hissy fit from the Obama campaign if McCain or Palin had made these statements. Somehow it would be racist.

oh fer chrisake!!!

bottom line...the map's changin' really fast now.

no one can deny that. the yellows are changing and the light blues are going yeller.

why not discuss what the trends are instead of this voice99 blog talk?

today mccain supposedly is leveraging off the white women vote. i beg to differ. it is the male vote that is triggering this.

obama has held his own in the oreilly interview where oreilly looked so desperate to keep and hold and flirt with obama that he came off looking like a buffoon and comic.

but there is no way to get around the big two questions at play in this campaign:

WAR
OIL

obama demonstrates in his words and platform a bewildering and frightening willingness to invade two countries and ramp up war. not close it down.

i'd say to all the obamites, "really? this is what you really want?"

and for oil, can you honestly tell me what is wrong with the logic of a surfeit driving down costs, keeping inflation low and growth high?

this means jobs. it means growing our national coffers to pay for education and healthcare reform.

The Obama lead has narrowed in Michigan and Colorado, but the McCain lead has noticeably narrowed in Florida and it has disappeared in Virginia.

There is movement, but it is not clear how the movement or the election will be resolved.

Stillow-
HOW CONVENIENT! You tell a lie and then leave!
Aren't you a smartie! Well whether you're here or not I'm calling you a liar. He wasn't talking about Palin at all. He was talking about McCain and you know it.

Both McCain and Obama have used that phrase in the past. Here is Obama using it in 2007:
"George Bush has given a mission to General Petraeus, and he has done his best to try to figure out how to put lipstick on a pig."

So who was he calling a pig here?

And here is a report of McCain using the phrase:
While he said he had not studied Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's plan, he said it was "eerily reminiscent" of the failed plan she offered as first lady in the 1990s.
"I think they put some lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig," he said of her proposal.

So was McCain calling Hillary a pig? Sounds like it to me! Stillow, you got to do better than that to win an argument with me.

Kiptin... funny, next obama will "dust' his shoulders while flipping the bird.

he's such a manly man ....
against women

Warning sign for Mccain: 74% of people think mccain would follow bush policies- 34% very likely, 34% somewhat likely

TYBO

have you even heard some of the stuff mccain has said about hillary's daughter being someone else's child? the right-wing has been after hillary clinton for years.. you guys are such hypocrites now its all of the sudden and issue because it about an extremists evangelical like palin!

you guys are the part of america i just wish die, you have ruined our country with extremists faith that sends our children to wars over lies- in other words your crusades, ran our economy into the ground, and committed torture.

Make all the excuses for Obama you want, but since Palin's well-remembered hockey mom joke from her convention speech, all will now connect lipstick with Palin. Obama knew what he was doing and that is why his crowd became uproarious. Obama is like a teenager. He makes statements that push (or exceed) the boundaries and then makes lame excuses that he meant something else.

Or do you really think Obama is that dumb that he did not make the connection with Palin before he spoke?

I will take either. Obama is rudely sexist or Obama is dumb.

Thanks, Tybo... for reminding me of some more of Obama's "juvenile" behavior.

kip tin

i cant believe your actually supporting mcsame.. think about what happened to our country. just think.. if its his race thats bothering you i understand, but at least just say it! were headed on the track? yes mcsame voted with bush 90% of the time? yes our economy is screwed? yes Mcsame voted for Iraq? yes Mcsame would continue bush economic policy? yes .... come on!

He was using that phrase before Palin made her speech. I have heard him use it in speeches. Politicians have stump speeches that they improvise on. That is what happened. McCain is being opportunistic in making an artificial link between that comment and Palin when he wasn't even talking about her. This is totally disingenuous!

First, "change"... your implication that I am racist reveals way too much about your character, and it ain't good.

Second, Obama voted WITH Bush on some pretty important policies. For example, the Bush/Cheney energy bill. McCain and Hillary voted against that bill. Obama is soooo hypocritical.

Third, Obama's so-called economic policies will only increase the budget deficit and the national debt with increasing federal government with his new and expanded programs. My first priority is to balance the federal budget, and a Reid/Pelosi Congress combined with a President Obama will not make that happen.

A pretty standard conservative debate tactic is to focus on 'politeness', and then insult the hell out of you.

Many posters here practice that debate tactic often.

Clear thinkers catch on quickly; but these conservatives are devoted to PT Barnum's famous statement.

from Wikipedia:

The phrase "putting lipstick on a pig" is an American colloquialism that means, "making the unattractive superficially attractive," with overtones of futility or of a lost cause. (You can put lipstick on a pig, but in the end, it's still a pig.) [7][8]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9903682-7.html

Hmmmm. I think the doohickey at the bottom said to post an intelligent and civil comment. I didn't think it said to indulge in pointless partisan flame wars. Can't we all agree to engage in non-partisan poll parsing like the loveable geeks we are? Just saying. Peace!

I wonder if Obama's comment will get any traction. That could potentially be another "bitter" comment.

"Lipstick on a pig", says Barrack Obama.

They way conservative walmart moms are relating with Palin, they might take that as an insult to themselves.

Conservatives have borrowed this debating technique, wherein, the advocate for one position accuses the other of 'impoliteness' from the British.

In British politics, conservative Torys often accuse labor of 'impolite' comments.

They don't care if those 'impolite' comments are colloquialisms.

In fact, British tories (like US conservatives) prefer that vernacular not be used in debates.

Oh, except for the fake Texas accent of GW Bush.

What a bunch of losers and cry babies.

Silly. Of course Obama knew what he was saying and to whom he was referring. All you have to do is watch the video and see his facial expression and watch him pause for the expected audience reaction.

It does not matter if he or anyone had used the "lipstick on a pig" phrase before. EVERYONE know that now "lipstick" is directly associated with Palin. One does not need to be a rocket scientist (or cognitive scientist) to figure it out. People's minds are now "primed" to make the connection.

Look, this election comes down to the simple fact that the Republicans have had control of the White House for 8 years and have screwed it up beyond belief. Does anyone disagree with this premise? Is our country not in a VERY difficult state right now because of our economy, foreign policy, unemployment, health care? Even the most conservative of individuals would hesitate to deny that our country is in a precarious state.

Now, WHY ON EARTH would we elect someone who supported 90% of the policies that put us in this ridiculous position in the first place?

C'mon, guys...I get the party affiliation thing, I really do. I know that many of us live and die by our party, even in the difficult times. But THIS is madness...we have been going in the wrong direction for 8 YEARS. We made the mistake of re-electing Bush. Why would we do it again?

I promise you, with all my heart, that if a Democrat had been sitting in office for 8 years and because of his policies, our country was a mess, I would vote to take this country in a different direction. If unemployment had shot up, our debt had reached record highs, we had lost the respect of the world (we did so many amazing things to earn that respect guys :( ), we were suffering from an energy crisis, millions of people were losing their homes and we were fighting a war with no end in sight (and of no real benefit to the people suffering at home) I would vote to take this country in a different direction.

I just can't believe we might actually make the same mistake a 3rd straight time...

Like I said, cry babies.

It appears not to matter that the focus of this site is on polls, nor that awful, even racist things have been said by the other side,

they want only to call names.

Earlier tonight,

zotz wrote:

zotz:

Stillow-
You are saying that Obama has not been personally attacked. Calling him "uppity" is not personal? Questioning his patriotism is not personal? Calling him elitist is not personal? This election has been one giant swift boat smear campaign by your side against Obama and now you are saying do not criticise Palin?

Yet, these conservatives don't read and don't care.

Yes, Reps are great at lying and maybe a lot of people will believe this. I think Obama never got the memo that he could never use that phrase again. I don't want to have ANOTHER Liar In Chief in the White House and that is why I am voting for Obama.

And another thing, Obama should demand that McCain apologise to Hillary for calling her a pig when he used that phrase when he was, unlike Obama, ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT HER!
SILLY!!!

for a litigator and the supreme parser of all words..obama knew the ambiguity of the term and knew he meant it in reference to the last high profile lipstick reference.

he'll get raked over the coals for this.

not my opinion here. the polls should show this.
he blew it with women, and is sweating bullets.

kerrchdavis,

Yes, Americans can and very possibly will make the same mistake the third time.

A good reason to not be respectful of the masses.

The framers did not believe the masses had the wisdom to select a leader.

That's why they created the electoral college.

And, they made certain that electors would not be bound to vote the way that their constituency voted.

So, the initial system of voting, even without the Missouri compromise and sufferage, was not the way we vote today.

The framers might have been right.

If we make the same mistake as a Nation the third time, I am quite certain that common sense will force us to believe that our system is irreparably broken.

This is a book title written by one of McCain's advisors:

Lipstick on a Pig: Winning In the No-Spin Era by Someone Who Knows the Game (Hardcover)
by Torie Clarke (Author)

Let's read the whole quote, why don't we. And then judge for yourself.

"You can put lipstick on a pig. It's still a pig. You can wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change. It's still gonna stink."

"We've had enough of the same old thing."

(I will say, as someone who is not a left or right wing nut, I laughed when I read that one of McCain's Truth Squad members, after being read the whole quote, said that yes, Obama also called Palin a fish)

what an elitist comment!!

were you on the steps of the supreme court on inauguration day protesting the courts anointing bush in 2001?

i know you weren't. only 14 people were. only 14 caqred enough to show up and make a statement.

now you say this junk.
the electoral college was designed ALSO to make certain that low population states had weighted importance. it was maintained after the gore debacle that it still should sit as is because it assured campaigning in all states.

well we know that's not true either.

a mistake was made 8 years ago. a mistake was not made four years though i hardly agreed with the choice.

i agree the system must be overhauled BUT your rank arrogance about the low mentality of this country is consistent with san francisco fund raising rhetoric.

Yes, but you can see what the right wing is doing.

They are searching for something to be insulted by.

this is a technique.

@mirrorball

anyway they parse this comment it is name calling. not even clever.

now that's change we can believe in.

Yes, it's pretty clear that right wing are posturing.

If you know them well enough, you can see how they are efforting to dupe the American people into a third straight election fiasco.

Let's hope they don't triumph, as it will be a triumph for a slippery form of totalitarianism, rather than a leap toward democratic renewal.

I'm gonna say that McCain's getting a little "testy" on this one. That's what he said about Obama about three weeks ago when Obama complained that McCain was questioning his patriotism. Sure, he didn't directly say Obama was unpatriotic, he just came up to that line.

so yeah, both sides do it. And both sides can get all hot and bothered over nothing for all I care. It's just funny to watch sometimes. I mean, sure I can see how one might read the lipstick comment as referring to Palin, but Jane Swift actually argued that he was also calling her a fish? Really? That's just reaching.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/09/a-piggish-debat.html

By tomorrow, millions of Rush and Hanity listeners will know Obama made the "Lipstick on a Pig" comments.

I can see it already. Moms with t-shirts saying "Barrack Obama I'm not a pigs with lipstick".

McCain's testiness is legend.

I didn't realize until a few days ago, though, that he was a very accident prone flyer, who had ditched or been in several flying accidents before being apprehended in Hanoi.

It seems that most anyone else would not have been allowed another plane (if they hadn't been an Admiral's son).

Yes, well if Limbaugh and Hannity decide the election, we know that America as we know it is a lost civilization.

to slinky

man we are fuked as a country, can you believe Mccain that voted with bush 90% of time including major decisions such as: the iraq war, and economy. and we might elect this guy..omg

Didn't Rasmussen adjust there partisin ID to 6% at the beginning of the month? It looks like the bounce is starting to settle a little bit, and we will be back were we started by the beginning of next week. It looks like the debates are going to be decisive, and Sarah better win her debate or all the energy she brought to the ticket is going to evaporate quickly. It is getting to the point where Palin is actually outshining McCain, which could be a major problem, and given the fact that the attention span of most voters these days is slightly shorter than a fruit fly's, everything we are talking about this week will be long gone.

Let's dee NBC and those notoroius lefties the WSJ Obama by 1, Rasmussen even, ARG even,
CBS McCain by 2, AaBC Mccain by 2, Gallup McCain by 5. Which one of these is not like the other. Gallup at this point is either the only one right or the only one wrong. Logic says the second.
The race is apparently a statistical tie. This means a great boost for McCAin. But some of you people rather than recognizing that you are about even want to declare the race over when in effect it is just starting.
The conventions are over let the campaign begin.

After watching McCains new attack ad I can only say that McCain, Palin and Rove are all pigs with or without lipstick.

Limbaugh and Hannity are not #1 and #2 for nothing. They are the voice of middle America. They along with #1 Fox ARE mainstream America. If extreme liberals would learn that, they might win an election.

BTW - I loved Greta's comment in Alaska that she could not find a person that referred to Palin as governor. Up there where she holds the highest approval rating of 83%, she is just known as Sarah.

There is a very serious problem with a statistical tie race at this time.

The US voting apparatus is not sensitive enough to handle it, and we have had almost no debate or anticipation of the very likely possibility (probability) of a repeat of 2000.

That is what I would like to see more discussion of here.

to louis

i'm an obama supporter, but i think mccain is ahead and the race is not a tie. the reason being is that the state polls have tightened so much. mi obama +1 penn. obama +2 wisconsin obama +3 = this is bad news, im bummed out!

Hannity and Limbaugh are hardly heard on FM radio, and most of the country listens thereto.

#1 and #2 are all on the internet, and, frankly, have nothing to do with Fox news.

Surprise: Even though McCain still can't write an email, you are currently using the media that is most current, direct, and the majority media, at this moment.

The election is tied.

America has no way to deal with a tie.

We don't count all the votes.

Many are thrown away.

Enough to make a difference.

Oh wow! How low can you liberals go? Calling a lady pig with lipstick -- But I guess these are desperate times for poor Dems --

The US voting apparatus is in a very healthy state and we should not be worried about it ... we should worry about demeaning remarks like the one that just came from the mouth of Mr. Obama ...

C'mon guys... Obama was talking about Palin with the lipstick on a pig... I dont think he was actually calling her a pig but he sure was creating imagery...also old fish stinking... thats a hit on McCain.... And yes I am a staunch Obama supporter... he needs to fight back or the republicans will steal his "change" brand.

Its amazing that the right wingers continue to claim media bias when I have yet to see a MSM organization... really press Palin on why she is hiding from them.... Palin is getting a free pass (temporarily I hope). It will be interesting to see if (when the gutter politics stops from both sides) Americans will focus on the issues that matter to them most and vote along those lines. Personally I am glad Obama is getting this seasoning he needs to sharpen up, he's at his best when hes coming from behind (Iowa anyone?!). He and Joe need to knock on some doors and do what it takes... no more room for complacency

I can't believe you guys are still talking about lipstick on a pig. This is the way to handle it. Attack back! This is how McCain expresses his respect for women. Let's see the Reps defend McCain on this.

McCain Jokes About Women-
"Did you hear the one about the woman who is attacked on the street by a gorilla, beaten senseless, raped repeatedly and left to die? When she finally regains consciousness and tries to speak, her doctor leans over to hear her sigh contently and to feebly ask, 'Where is that marvelous ape?'"

"Why is Chelsea Clinton so ugly? Because her father is Janet Reno."
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11823.html

Just watch, they will all become magically silent on this issue because they don't want to talk about McCain's jokes about women.

Wow! I was wrong. I thought it would not break until tomorrow, but I Tivo'd Hannity and he already has the this as his top story! Watch your mouth Obama. If you called my Christian mom a pig with lipstick, you might not like the result.

@zotz

I honestly dont see what the big deal is.... Palin referred to herself as a dog with lipstick... she seems to like animal references so there was one more....:>

Anyway let the republicans have their field day.. the polls are temporarily in their favor... the bump will fade and the race will be a statistical tie again with Obama up by 1 or 2. The debates will settle this one way or the other.

illinoisindie-
I believe in fighting back. If you don't fight people think you don't really care. Kerry didn't fight back.

I also think that Hannity is doing exactly what I explained above: He is making an effort to become insulted, and then reacting to it.

It is a PT Barnum level debating technique.

It works when you have a very unsophisticated audience.

One of McCain's advisors wrote a book entitled:

Lipstick on a Pig: Winning In the No-Spin Era by Someone Who Knows the Game (Hardcover)
by Torie Clarke (Author)

She knew exactly what she was writing about.

Like the 'no spin' zone, it is ALL spin.

Virtually nothing factual can come from the constantly lying republicans.

Only a retarded chimp would cite "hannity" as news. What a joke.

Really

I don't normally comment on issues not concerning the polls but this is just silly. Here are Obama's comments

“John McCain says he’s about change, too, and so I guess his whole angle is, ‘Watch out George Bush.’ Except for economic policy, health care policy, tax policy, education policy, foreign policy and Karl Rove-style politics … That’s not change. That’s just calling something the same thing, something different,” Obama said.
“But you know … you can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig. You know, you can … wrap an old fish in a piece of paper called change, it’s still going to stink after eight years.”

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/09/mccain-camp-accuses-obama-of-comparing-palin-to-a-pig/

How anyone can think that is calling Palin a pig is beyond me.

this is zotz' entire 7:51PM post. It makes a good deal of sense to me.

zotz:

Stillow-
You are saying that Obama has not been personally attacked. Calling him "uppity" is not personal? Questioning his patriotism is not personal? Calling him elitist is not personal? This election has been one giant swift boat smear campaign by your side against Obama and now you are saying do not criticise Palin?

We have got to the point where the Reps are saying that the election IS NOT ABOUT THE ISSUES! Sorry, but if we catch McCain-Palin in a lie we are going to say something. We may lose but we will fight all the way.

Churchill said that a country that goes down fighting can come back but if it just surrenders then it's finished.

again, the pubs are desperately trying to get insulted, so that they will legitimately be indignant.

It's a debating technique.

But, it also smells of something truly sinister and slimy in their planning.

Now I understand what Biden meant by saying electing hockey mom Sarah Palin would be "backwards". Obviously, it's because you would be electing a hockey mom "pig with lipstick".

The assertion that the American electoral system can fairly decide a very close election is without foundation.

Whoooo, Hannity and Rush are sooooo scary.

Zotz, I'm with you---you have to fight back.

Slinky, I agree with your point about the debating tactic. I would add my own algorithm about McCain supporters:

1) Create a phony controversy that detracts from the fact that McCain has nothing to offer.

2) Read and fail to understand accurate and thoughtful riposte from an Obama supporter.

3) Insult Obama supporters and accuse them of drinking koolaid and of becoming desperate.

4) Come up with a new useless controversy that avoids the issues.

Voila!

@zotz

Send e a link to anyone one in the McCain campaign who called into question Obama's patriotism.....
He is called elitist because he goes to PA and speaks high praises to the folks, then goes to San Fran and talks about how they bitterly cling to there religion and guns....that is an elitist comment. If he would stop making stupid comments like that, no one would be calling him an elitist.
Can you send me a link to anyone in the McCain campaign calling Obama a muslim?
You guys keep whining about patriotism and muslims, yet no one in the mccain campaign has said anything. If you want to point to right wing nutty talk show hosts, then our side will point to left wing nutty blogs like the Kos, ya know, the ones who spread rumors about Palin's kids....then the MSM picked up....

Get real man.

marctx-
What do you think of McCain's sense of humor?
Would your Christian mother think jokes about rape were funny?

Cheney has now come out in support of Palin

Jay Leno:

"as you know, President Bush was not at the Republican convention because of a disaster... his Presidency".

@stillow: "Send e a link to anyone one in the McCain campaign who called into question Obama's patriotism."

Here it is:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7526428.stm

Stillow-
QUESTION: "Do you question at all his patriotism and secondly do you think your idea of patriotism and his are any different and is that something that you share?"

McCAIN: "I think that Senator Obama is a great American success story. I think his family is. I think he's someone who is admired and respected throughout this country and the world."

That answer is pretty clear, isn't it?
A person that doesn't know how many homes he owns calling Obama elitist is bizarre. A person that says under five million a year income is middle class calling Obama elitist is beyond bizarre. We're in the twilight zone now.

@pion

I just read thru it and no where at all does it quote someone in the mccain camp as questioning obama's patriotism.

@zotz

That was it? That McCainquote didn't say obama was unpatriotic........that is where you get that accusation from? Unbeleivable, that si why the left gets the balme for drinking kool aid. He said nothing but positive things in that quote......your stretching big time!
I owen more than one home, I own an investment home in Arizona, am I an elitist? An elitist isn't someone who has achived success or propserity, your mixing elitist with someone who is successful....and elitist is someone who would brag about owning that many homes, which mcain never did....As much as the left likes to, we don't trash people in this country who are successful. So owning multiple homes doesn't make you an elitist....going to San Frang an and bagging on middle class small town americans does.
Your arguments are all huge stretches and actually figments of your imagination.
So to clairfy, successful people are not elitists, people who look down on middle class america are....the clining comment is a valid definition of an elitist comment....owning more than one house is not.............you lose, again.

@stillow: In the article, McCain is quoted as saying:

"It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign."

A patriot would *never* lose a war for personal ambition. From Merriam-Webster:

patriot: "one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests"

Stillow-
You can smear a person with innuendo without making a direct attack. I'm not telling you anything you don't know.
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2008/08/26/mccain-challenges-obama-s-patriotism-again.aspx

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0608/McCain_on_Obamas_patriotism.html

I agree, this comment:

"I had the courage and the judgment to say I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign."
John McCain criticises Barack Obama's position on the "surge"

Questions Obamas patriotism

That is because even when the surge proved very successful, by "all" accounts, Obama still opposed it....because it was not the cool thing with the far left who he needs. So the commet is valid...if the object is to win a war, mccain supported the surge when it was very unpopular, so his comment about rather losing an election than a war is valid....obama just up until last week was opposed to the surge....again so he would not tick off his far left base, then of course suddenly he came out and said it was a resounding success.....

You guys are stretching at the very best....and by stretching I mean "STRETCHING".

If someone asked me, "Do you think Stillow is a liar?" and my answer was, "I think Stillow has been very successful" wouldn't be pretty clear that I was calling you a liar?

This isn't rocket science!

Why people hate GW (and by extension, McCain):

(1) continuous lies.

(2) expresses no apology when wrong.

(3) never expresses regret.

(4) is ostensibly never wrong.

(5) never seeks advice of "elitists", with the exception of the American Enterprise Institute.

(6) Given the choice, will always favor those with incomes above $ 5 Million.

(7) Has complete confidence in the American electoral system and judiciary.

Except when they go against him.

But, even then he still isn't ever wrong.

...and the lipstick pig thing....I though tit was quite obvious he was taking a jab at Palin.....the proble for Obama is this. The far left has sabotaged his ability to critisize her. Because the far left went out ad spead nasty rumors about her kids, the media covered it...it angered a lot of people. Now every little thing Obama says about her, even in a stretch of an insult like the pig thing, is going to kill him. Because Palin was so attacked on such a personal nature regarding her kids, the people have already taken her side now by default. People will accept a certain level of personal attacks on the candidates themselves, but when you bring the kids into it, the people don't accept that type of garbage.....and it has forced obama into a really tough spot politcally....

@zotz

Again if that is what you consider an attack on patriotism, I can see why the folks are not buying it......cus your simply making it up with a huge stretch....

slinky-
Good comment! In that statement McCain actually was calling Obama a traitor.

Slinky

"If we make the same mistake as a Nation the third time, I am quite certain that common sense will force us to believe that our system is irreparably broken."

If M/P wins it will be because they got more votes. Actually, more EV's. Not because the system is broken. Seems like the usual lib belief that they know better than everyone else does. That kind of thinking is why they keep losing. They want to shove a north-eastern lib down our throats. Without their help our kids wouldn't have shoes on their feet or textbooks in their classrooms.

There is a reason a NE lib hasn't won since FDR. We don't need you to save us from ourselves, and are insulted that you think we do.

This is absolute crxxp.

Here's why: We all know that the level of resentment, as one co-worker put it to me, about two little black girls running around the White House, is enormously high.

You are discounting the amount of racism, outright racism that I hear in the American street.

And, in spite of all this, Obama is actually leading in the electoral vote at this moment.

If McCain would play honestly and fairly (which he is decidedly not doing) there would be no question of an Obama win.

David Plouffe wrote a letter tonight to supporters, expressing that the McCain campaign was "lying" on the bridge to nowhere issue.

Well, they are. McCain and Palin are lying.

But, the American electorate may be hoodwinked by these lies into voting in the worse of the two candidates: Clearly McCain is that.

@Bigmike

Well put.

Stillow-
Why don't you address slinky's comment. Is this your tactic, when your losing change the subject?

Americans are sick of elitist politicians insulting Americans and their beliefs. This "Pig with Lipstick" comment will end Obama's career.

@Stillow: Obama opposed the surge because it did not make sense to risk the lives of more young Americans in pursuit of an ill-defined 'victory' in a war of choice to help Iraqi politicians that couldn't and still can not get their act together.

That war has been catastrophic for America.

@slinky

First off, I am no racist....I don't care if "two little balck girls" as you put it are running around the white house, so long as there parents are conservative and beleive in traditional values...and not left wing, do as i say, not as i do crap.
Secondly, you libs take a holier than thou mindset....you thik obama is an innocent teddy bear who isn't negative at all, who doesn't spin facts to support his approach....he runs only positive ads, he is just lovable and fuzzy. He is just as vicious as all other politicans....you are lying to yourselves.
Thirdly, the bridg eto nowhere, I would drop that if I were you, Obama voted for the bill contaiing that, TWICE. McCain voted NO, TWICE!
Obama voted for the Bush energy plan, McCain voted NO...........before you make crazy statements, at least research what votes obama has made in hsi life.....and not jus tht eones he voted "present"

Hi marctx- Why won't you answer the question I asked at 11:34?

@BigMike: "There is a reason a NE lib hasn't won since FDR" Last time I checked Kennedy was elected after FDR. At least get your history straight.

Bigmike provides more evidence for the 'let's get insulted by the arrogant elitist and not talk about the issues' gambit.

More debating tactic. Nothing substantive.

Just a smokescreen for not having anything positive to contribute to America.

Obama is desperately trying to change the discourse to a future positive view of America.

An America susceptible to change and improvement and greatness.

There is no way that McCain will ever bring us that.

He will bring us war. No question. And, without a draft, he will bring us losing war.

The military is so overstretched, there is no way to address it without addressing the economy.

And, McCain has admitted, he doesn't understand economics that well.

@marctx: "Americans are sick of elitist politicians insulting Americans and their beliefs. This "Pig with Lipstick" comment will end Obama's career."

The lying about the 'bridge to nowhere' will confine SP's career to the right wing talk show circuit.

Pion

As I understand history, JFK was not a lib. He had nothing in common with the socialist left of today.

@pion

JFK was not a liberal, by todays standards he would be a tax cutting small g'ment conservative....ask not what your country can do for you, but what can do for your country....that statements goes agaisnt everything libs beleive in, since libs want bigger g'ment, cus we dumb folk cannot take care of ourselves with out the g'ment doing it for us.

Bigmike,

From this 'elitist's' point of view, you understand nothing about JFK or the Kennedy's.

From this "elitist" point-of-view, just back from the Cape and Harvard, you don't know anything about JFK or the Kennedys.

Not anything.

Stillow-
Now you are giving us indignation. Slinky never called you a racist. He said, "You are discounting the amount of racism, outright racism that I hear in the American street."
That is a legitimate opinion and you get all huffy-puffy about it.

YOU ARE EVADING. What is your comment on this statement by McCain.
"I had the courage and the judgment to say I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign."

You lost the patriotism argument! JUST ADMIT IT! If you're man enough.

JFK understood that we live in a racist country (which it still is) that needs Federal enforcement of anti-racism statues.

He understood that the poor need programs to help them. Government programs.

And, he understood that the Government owed a duty to its people. He just hoped that the people would understand that they owe a duty to Government.

It appears that the Repubs. don't understand this yet.

Yeah, sure, makes tons of sense to double down when the administration not only concocted the evidence that got us into war, but then completely mismanaged that war and then subsequently got bogged down in it. Meanwhile the Iraqi government was showing no signs of stepping up (despite claims by the administration that they had been for years, along with their army).

So when failed leadership asks you to increase the troop levels by 25% when they are already stretched very, very thin, and they don't offer any evidence of having changed strategy, do you just wave a flag and cross your fingers?

People that fail in their policies repeatedly, or rather primarily, should not be rewarded when they have one success (which is clearly not all due to the troop additions).

I'm a strong believer that Iraq was starting to get the clear message that Americans were getting tired of the war, the way that it was being managed, and that we were not going to put up with their inaction in regaining control of their own country for much longer. This is one of the reasons why they started to step up. The Anbar awakening started before the surge, and this is the primary reason why that province is considered to be somewhat stable now. It was Iraqis that finally made an effort besides just obstructing us.

Now Republicans would love to re-write history, and they of course try and try and try and try, and some boneheads out there actually believe their total crap. Obama on the other hand assume that people are more intelligent than that and they stick with the facts.

The facts are that the war was not just a bad idea, it was a scam. It was grossly mismanaged from the start. It's one of the biggest single mistakes in our country's history regardless of the eventual outcome.

And it is my opinion that the faster we get out of Iraq, the faster they step up. Getting out does not mean losing, getting out means winning. Making a concerted effort to get out is the best strategy for winning. No one is going to "cut-and-run" either, you withdraw some troops, look for issues, respond to issues, and when all is clear you withdraw some more.

No anyone that doesn't understand this is an idiot. Seriously. How many years of this lunacy do people have to experience before they figure out that we do not belong there, and our presence destabilizes the entire Middle East.

@BigMike + Stillow: Kennedy wasn't an Liberal? Have you heard of his new Frontier policy? From wikipedia:

"Kennedy called his domestic program the "New Frontier". It ambitiously promised federal funding for education, medical care for the elderly, and government intervention to halt the recession. Kennedy also promised an end to racial discrimination. In 1963, he proposed a tax reform which included income tax cuts, but this was not passed by Congress until 1964, after his death. Few of Kennedy's major programs passed Congress during his lifetime, although, under his successor Johnson, Congress did vote them through in 1964–65."

No doubt you are going to argue that his tax cut shows he couldn't have been a Liberal. Please take into account that he obviously had a belief that government could improve the lives of people. He was for medicare---the bete noire of the right---which was eventually past by LBJ under his great society program, and he believed that government could play a role in fighting racial discrimination not to mention how government could contribute to education. BigMike and Stillow, I'm sure you will ignore the facts so I won't argue anymore about this obvious historical point.

Slinky

My statements were not a debating tactic. There will be an election and one side or the other will win. If my side loses, you won't hear me crying that the system is broke.

Seems to me the notion that the constitution needs tinkered with if my side loses is a pretty big ISSUE.

Apparently you know much more about the Kennedys than I do. Give Teddy my love next time you see him.

Bigmike-
If you lose the way we did in 2000 I think you're going to say something, and it probably won't be very nice.

I gotta simple question for all you libs. All I hear all of you saying is that mccain is avoiding "issues" and is engaging in personal attacks, smears and trying to make it a personality contest. Then answer me this.

Why does Obama refuse McCains town hall invitations to debate the "issues"? McCain offered a series of town hall's...so real people can ask real questions important to them, Obama said hell no. What better way to take your opponent on and get to the issues the people care about? If Obama is so confident in his positions, he should welcome those town halls, instead he is running for the hills. Why won't he engage mccain on the ground, on the issues....asked by real people and not commentators? Why?
I'll tell you why, its cus libs are doing what they do best, they claim they wanna talk about issues, cus the other guy is busy doing personal attacks, when the truth is its libs who fear the issues and then accuse the other side of avoding issues, then engaging in there own smear campaigns, while at the same time blaming the other guy for avoding issues.
What better way to discuss issues and differnces with your opponent than to accept town hall discussions?
Obama is scared to debate mccain on the issues, he knows he would get whipped and exposed for who he is....there is no other reason in the world obama would refuse the town hall's....if he truly wanted to present hte people with a choice about issues, he would have taken the challenge, instead he ran away from it....just like libs always do, run away from conflict..............
Checkmate for McCain!!!!

Bigmike,

When women got the vote, the constitution was 'tinkered' with; when blacks got the vote the constitution was 'tinkered' with, and frankly, when the US Supreme Court decided Bush v. Gore in 2000, the constitution got 'tinkered' with.

So, 'tinkering' with the Constitution isn't new.

It's the hesitation to 'tinker' to form a more perfect union and more perfect Democracy that prevents this country from living up to what it could be.

OK, if you get your way, and McCain is President for 4 or 8 years, you will fully understand what I mean: We will enter a period of profound economic and social decline in the US -- most of America see this. But, you have hidden your head in the sand.

We have already begun a rather serious economic descent: And, you want to prolong it and make it more severe, partly because you lack knowledge, and partly because you are afraid of being judged by the 'elitists'.

So, I ask you: What have you to gain from the imminent decline of the United States?

Or, is there some rational reason that you oppose Obama. That you see that he offers a worse outlook than McCain for you and yours.

I cannot imagine a rational person with this view.

@Stillow: "Obama is scared to debate mccain on the issues, he knows he would get whipped and exposed for who he is....there is no other reason in the world obama would refuse the town hall's....if he truly wanted to present hte people with a choice about issues, he would have taken the challenge, instead he ran away from it....just like libs always do, run away from conflict..............
Checkmate for McCain!!!!"

Oh grow up.

@Stillow and Bigmike: I have a simple question for you: why do you support McCain. Your answer can not refer to Obama, it has to be affirmative.

Thanks.

That is it? Grow up is how you defend Obama running for the hills at the first attempt to talk about real issues? MCain laid it out there for him, al lhe had to was say yes, lets do it....and we'd ge tto see head to head who was better on issues, but your guy didn't want any part of the issues....he wants to sit back and whine about the other side avoiding issues.....its moronic.

@pion

I will be happy to answer as soon as you answer mine, don't deflect, why did Obama back down from discussing the issues with the people?

zotz

I will say congrats and we will try harder next time.

Try harder to get out the word on issues such as smaller govt, lower taxes, individual liberty, states rights, national defense, picking your own doctor, safety from terrorism, to convince people to vote for our side. And lots of other issues. I could go on for a long time, but I am an awfully slow typer. I didn't get those govt shoes and textbooks.

Town halls are not necessarily the best way, it is just what McCain likes. Kerry beat Bush last time in the debates and the Reps said, "We are not electing a debater in chief."
That was their answer! And all the loyal dittoheads nodded in agreement and voted for Bush.

And now debates, all of a sudden, are of paramount importance. The lying going on here makes me sick.

@Bigmike

My family never got any g'ment handouts....we did ok...for a long time my father worked 12 hour days 6 days a week, but we made it....and now he is quite successful....and so am I because of it...and we did it without a single g'ment handout.....we did it thru thaat thing called "hard work"........

@zotz

You did not answer my question, mccain told obama, lets meet up, talk to soe folks and debate the issues, obama refused....and then you obama supporters have the nerve to get on here and claim its mccain who is running from the issues.....you guys like like crazy people making that argument.

I dont want govt run health care.

I dont want an impotent military.

I dont want my hard earned money taken and given to someone who wont try to earn their own.

I dont want to fight back at terrorist with subpoenas instead of bullets.

I dont want the govt to take over private sector functions like R & D on things like alternative fuels. The free market does so much better at things like that.

I dont want someone in the WH who thinks I need him/her more than he/she needs me.

Shall I continue?

@Stillow: my recollection is that Obama made a counter-offer to McCain for five debates. Here is the link:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cq/20080803/pl_cq_politics/politics2933571

And here is an exerpt:

"Under McCain's plan, the candidates would have met once a week between June and the Democratic National Convention at the tail end of August. Though it left room for negotiation of details, the McCain camp suggested that the candidates appear together for 60 to 90 minutes at each meeting and take "blind questions" from members of an audience ranging from 200 to 400 people.

Plouffe called the concept appealing but said Obama would prefer debates styled after the famous Lincoln-Douglas go-rounds of the 1858 Illinois Senate campaign -- highly structured three-hour presentations that featured one candidate speaking for an hour, the second candidate speaking for 90 minutes and the first candidate getting 30 minutes for a rebuttal statement.

Ultimately, the Obama campaign countered with a proposal for a series of five debates including the three debates under the purview of the commission. The counterproposal included a debate on the economy and one on foreign policy - one of which would have been held on the July 4 weekend.

McCain rejected the Obama offer, and the two sides accused each other of politicizing the debate over the debates."

I have nerve??? What kinda loco weed you been smokin'? How about this guy's nerve?

Rick Davis, campaign manager for John McCain's presidential bid, insisted that the presidential race will be decided more over personalities than issues during an interview with Post editors this morning.
"This election is not about issues," said Davis. "This election is about a composite view of what people take away from these candidates."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/09/mccain_manager_this_election_i.html

I guess none of you libs have an actual answer to why the candidate (obama) who claims to wanna discuss issues, avoids them by not taking mccains town hall challenge........sorry guys, talk is cheap....actions always speak louder than words. While Obama is hiding, mccain will continue to talk issues....maybe obama ran to the senate where he voted for the bridg eto nowhere? Or voted with bush on that bogus energy plan? Or maybe just voted present....

C'mon guys, if your gonna talk a big game, support the guy who at least backs it up....

The town hall challenge was a gimmick Stillow.

When Obama opted for fewer town halls (so the guy could actually campaign where his staff thought would be best), McCain said no.

So it was a gimmick just like the Palin pick.

@zotz

That's nice....mccain offered up the issues to obama on a silver platter....obama went hiding under the table....you can divert from that fact......it just makes the rest of us laugh....

"I'm Obama, I want to talk issues, unless I have to take actual questions...and my opponent is there too, then uhhh, maybe I uhhh, don't really, uhhh want to talk that much, uhhhh, about issues" "Can we just talk about pigs wearing lipsitck instead?"

Sheeeesh.

As usual its been fun dismantling you libs, time for sleep....gotta get sleep so I can head to work tomorrow and pay for more g'ment entitlements.................

Right behind you Stillow. I have taxes to pay too.

I don't think we are arguing with rational people. If it appears that they are losing they just change the subject. Stillow did that tonight. It becomes a game of one-upsmanship. Utterly meaningless!

@Bigmike:

"I dont want govt run health care."

First, let me point out that McCain will keep medicare as far as know. I also believe that he has no intention of killing medicaid or killing the veterans health administration so you're out of luck. Also, hard working people get wiped out of their savings in the current fantastic private sector run health care when a catastrophic disease strikes. My guess is that you don't care about infant mortality rates and life expectancy so I won't give any stats for that.

"I dont want an impotent military."

The Iraq war has made our military impotent to face other threats like Russia, Iran or South Korea which partly explains GWB's new found zeal to now negotiate with these countries. McCain would stretch the military further.

"I dont want my hard earned money taken and given to someone who wont try to earn their own."

I haven't seen anywhere in McCain's platform that he plans to do away with unemployment insurance or welfare.

"I dont want to fight back at terrorist with subpoenas instead of bullets."

Last time I checked, no one was proposing the idiotic idea of sending subpoenas to terrorists so that point is irrelevant.

"I dont want the govt to take over private sector functions like R & D on things like alternative fuels. The free market does so much better at things like that."

Government run R&D is responsible for radar, sonar, and nuclear fusion and fission. The first two development won the air and sea war against the Luftwaffe and the U-boats while the latter ended world war 2 against the Japanese. Governement R&D also invented the internet (DARPA and CERN---this one by the Europeans). If you look at the government record at R&D you'll be pretty impressed.

"I dont want someone in the WH who thinks I need him/her more than he/she needs me."

I really think you're out of luck with McCain on that one. I don't know what your background is, but with McCain the son and grandson of admirals, I don't buy his every man persona.

"Shall I continue?"

Please do.

I don't know how they always convince themselves. But I guess I was like that too when I used to watch FOX.

I recommend everyone by the new book called "The Battle Within". It's very informative and very good.

Stillow, Bigmike---leaving us so sooooooooon?

Guys, I had a good time.

Good night.

pion there's nothing you can do. They are convinced by whatever pundits they listen to and nothing no matter how true it is will change their minds.

Take it from a convert who was able to get out of the grip of FOX: if a person sees them as credible, they believe a lot of false crap and they believe that every other media source that isn't owned by Murdock is left wing bias. It's kind of like the Chinese thinking that their state-run media is telling the truth and the rest of the western world is lying. It's very hard to make them snap out of it.

I snapped out of it when I realized that my government blatantly lied to me so we could go to war with a country we shouldn't have gone to war with yet. I don't know what it will take for them to snap out of it.

Oh by the way for anyone who's awake:

CERN is about to test the LHC at 3 AM our time. Go to their website at http://lhc-first-beam.web.cern.ch/lhc-first-beam/Welcome.html

and go to the live webcast at around 3 if you want to see history be made.

@Robi: What got you into that crap in the first place?

Being a high schooler in NY on 9/11 and wanting to blow the **** out of anyone responsible.

@Robi: Yeah, I know what you mean.

That's what I don't understand about people. It's as if Kentucky was the one attacked or Arkansas and they act like they are more patriotic than me. I don't think I'm more or less patriotic than anyone. But New Yorkers know full well what it's like to be attacked head on and we're reminded every day when we walk into grand central (I'm in middle of nowhere Ohio right now for college but I go home for breaks). Soldiers with armed M16s are on guard all the time and tensions are always high.

When a steam pipe exploded, everybody thought that it was a terrorist attack initially. WE WERE ATTACKED ON 9/11! So I don't want to hear anybody say that I'm not as patriotic as Jim-bob in Kentucky. When they decided to strike at a symbol of America, they chose the twin towers and the pentagon and apparently the white house. New Yorkers vote with national security on their minds every day because we're one of the most likely targets for another terrorist attack.

Sorry I just had to get that off my chest. I just don't understand how people could think that New Yorkers wouldn't care about such a thing as national security when we're one of the biggest targets.

Every day I'm afraid that I'm going to lose my parents to a nuclear bomb and I vote for Obama with that in mind.

@Robi: Great post. Thanks for sharing that with us.

The Democratic governor of Montana made a great speech at the Denver convention, though most coverage ignored it. He's at least as folksy as Palin, and doesn't claim to be an attack dog.

I have no idea whether MT is out of play, but they have a D governor and a D Senator, so they aren't exactly Alaskans.

The issues vs personality split in this race is interesting. D's have issues, R's (for now) have (one) personality. Poor little Sarah Barracuda/Pitbull, having to answer all those rude questions while handlers use her family as a human shield. She shouldn't have to know anything about issues! Who really cares about her past? Lighten up! Drill. baby.drill!

So impolite, those reporters. Why can't they be nice and believe everything they're told by pathological liars like Karl Rove? He's got to be loving this crap, while the Earth spins on toward a new climate set point.

But hey, with a Holy War going on and a Holy Pipeline in the works, everything's under control. Go back to sleep, sleep...

If the Palin bubble lasts until Nov. 4, they win. What DOES God want to happen? Lower cap gains taxes? Cheap oil?

Robi & pion,

I campaigned for Goldwater in '64 and thought it might be cool if we turned Hanoi into a glass parking lot. I read Ayn Rand and thought about how noble rugged individualism is. I was a Young Republican, but I grew out of it.

In other words, I didn't get it that other people in other places were sort of like me and not just disposable TV people. You can tell that's part of the R mentality when they say stuff like "Who cares about what anybody in Europe or anywhere else thinks? We're Americans!"

As strange as it seems, Dr. Strangelove helped change my life. It helped me realize that the "adults" weren't in control and I had to relax and think for myself instead of following orders from flawed father figures.

Thanks for your story, Robi.

Back to the polls.

Have another look at the recent national polls listed on the pollster.com front page:

These are NBC, IBD/TIPP, ABC and the 3 daily trackings. Of these, Gallup and IBD differ from the rest. Both include some odd features already commented on by others, but cancel each other. I list these separately. Grouping the balance in order:

NBC - Obama leads by 1
Rasmussen - Tie
Diageo - McC leads by 1
ABC - McC leads by 2

This is a remarkably neat pattern.

The other two have:

Gallup McC leads by 5
IBDD Obama Leads by 5

The two conventions, and the sudden intro of a completely unknown VP candidate, have led to wild swings in McCain's numbers. Once the convention bounces fade, and voters get to know more about Sarah Palin, the numbers will again settle down (until the debates).

My guess is that the national picture will revert to pretty much the same small lead we previously had for Obama, but with a different distribution of EV's on the map.

The problem with the "lipstick on a pig" comment by Obama:

If not intentional, it seems quite Freudian. Then to refer to "an old fish" when McCain is "old" in the same sentence really just takes the whole Freudian reference to a whole new level.

But just imagine for a moment, the MSM reaction if John McCain were speaking and said quite innocently:

"Barack Obama is a SLAVE to his ambition..."

Totally innocent statement - not racist in any way, and yet, the MSM would claim that John McCain used these words because Obama is a black man.

I don't think Obama was being intentionally rude, I think he was showing poor judgement which is far worse.

Boomshak:

I think that Obama will stand by his statement.

I hope the Republican Campaign will take Obama up on his best allegation: that McCain and Palin tells lies ergo they are liars, its as simple as that.

I hope the Obama Campaign puts out They lie about "the Bridge To Nowhere". She apparently didn't tell the whole truth about "Troopergate".

If it quack likes a duck - it is a duck.

What I am confused about is how the pubs can think that their current economic plan is working.

Sure, I know all about Fox news and how the Gov't always does the wrong thing and shouldn't be involved in the markets or people's lives, but,

hey, that's all about the 19th century.

In the 20th, although the South doesn't respect it, we got income taxes, and in the late 20th many corporate bailouts. The most recent and massive of which occurred under GWB. Now, we have Shearson in so much danger it may need a bailout.

Look, the Know-nothing, no government, no taxes, starve-the-beast ideology is so defunct, hypocritical, and without substance that only a non-human primate could buy into them.

So, Fox news and the pubs must (must) be using a form of brainwashing or human stupidity gilding to get believers to see it their way.

I wish I could have faith in the American electorate, but at my age (mid 50s), I have seen just too much stupidity for that.

The voting system is also broken. Since the pubs don't want it fixed, I have no respect for them. None.

New McCain Ad defending Palin and other hockey moms and lipstick:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZd_Y_D-RaA

marctx

There is no defending the indefensible. Your Candidates are both Liars. I can't think of a nice way of putting it and like hockey moms!

Rasmussen just posted their morning update.

Tied for committed voters.

Obama +1 with Leaners: 48%-47%...

The liberal perspective:

Russell Brand pulled Sarah Palin electric chair jokes at VMA

Russell Brand was forced to cut jokes about Sarah Palin sending her own daughter to the electric chair when he presented the MTV Video Music Awards, he has said.

The British comedian appeared to annoy celebrities and some fans when he made a series of risque political and sexual jokes hosting the 25th anniversary show.

"But also, as a Republican she is pro-execution so she is going to give her the electric chair for being a little slut.

"You're likable enough, hillary"

this for me was the window into this man's real persona when he was under pressure. it sent me packing from his camp and firmly over to hillary.

i believed then that this was the true man, you always get the real deal when someone is under fire and starts to sweat.

well, yesterday was a really bad day polls wise for obama. he was panicking and it came out, the window opened again. it was entirely consistent with the above quote, that angry mocking put down thing.

that the riff "pit with lipstick" had been the byte that may have caused his recent plunge in the polls is what clearly caught in his throat.
and his amygdala, that almond sized anger hub in his brain got thebetter of him, and played the riff out "pig with lipstick" is most telling.

sometimes campaigns crash around bytes, visual or sound. Take the Dean Scream ot the Dukakis tank photo op, or the windesurfing Kerry.

While some in the media equate this with Mccain's 5 million dollar middle class sta, it is hardly the same.

it is far more toxic and belies the bully that the HIllary quote really revealed.

so hats off to palin. someone finally brought out the true obama.

the polls will tall the rest no matter how loud
axelrod shouts.

this candidate trained in parsing and measuring his responses has shown in this that he is a lose cannon under pressure.

You libs are so predictable and can't manage to bring anything more to the table than democrat talking points and cliches. Only a lib would turn "swift boat" into a verb and think that Americans cringe at the idea Kerry was defeated with the truth. And he was the greatest democrat military hero in the last century.

I haven't heard you libs talk about how Palin is being "thomased." Of course Anital Hill has faded into obscurity while he sits on the Supreme Court.

Either way the dems lost. Perhaps it has something to do with truth always winning?

So now you're stuck on the mantra McCain is 4 more years of Bush. That's such an obvious lie that we can see where Obama's compaign is heading. And Algore's claim of inventing the internet surely gave him a win.

marctx

Having lived for some of my life in the UK including some of the time Margaret Thatcher was in power. I have to say that it is very difficult for the Brits to understand the US gender issue.

Obviously the Germans too, led by Angela Merkel. Please note both these women are associated with the Right.

I can also say but for the Washington Post and to some extent the New York Times during Watergate, the American Press has to be the worst at reporting and analyzing news in the free world. MSNBC, FOX and CNN are in the News Entertainment business. Can ABC have any credibility in reporting Sarah Palin objectively given their exclusive access for two days?

Our Country went to war in Iraq on a lie, the Republican Party put Big Oil's interest before the Country's interest; of bringing Bin Laden and Al Qaeda to justice.

No matter how much lipstick you put on the pig, its still a pig.

Thoughtful:
Thanks for putting lipstick on the NY Times, Washington Post and, by ommission, CBS and NBC. They look much prettier now. Oink.

NevermetanhonestlibneitherhaveI

Yes CBS and NBC too as they should all be reporting that both McCain and Palin are Liars and why, maybe they will. The truth is that:

No matter how much lip stick you put on the pig, IT is still a pig!

No matter what paper you wrap round the old fish, IT still smells like old fish.

What do these 2 noble American servants of the people have on offer for the Americn people - 4 more years either worse or the same!

"." Of course Anital Hill has faded into obscurity.."

LOL, gee's do some homework

What thoughtful?? Everybody knows Obama is loved in Europe. He should run for king of Europe or something. Let an American win our presidency in 2008.

Tybo:

You just make my point. Bless you.

Marctx

You are being disengenuous like your candidates. The point is that in Europe Women leaders have been accepted.

Marctx,

Europeans love Obama so what? Is it a bad thing? They are our allies.

Israelis love McCain. Does that mean he should replace Olmert to be Israeli prime minister?

Do we need a leader whom the whole world hates (i.e. GWB)?

Thoughtful:

More of the same... Obama's attempt at a joke yesterday. You people are parrots.

The rest of the world loves Obama because they want America to be weaker. Obama is the right man for the job. And yesterday's announcement of British PM Gordon Brown...lowest popularity ever...1 in 7 Brits like him. That with Ahmadinejad's endorsement is a big plus for Obama.

NeverMet:

"..And yesterday's announcement of British PM Gordon Brown...lowest popularity ever...1 in 7 Brits like him..."

1 in 5 Americans likes Bush and guess whom he endorsed?

Merkel, Sarkozy and Berlusconi support McCain. They liked Bush too. Do they support McCain because they want weaker US?

The allies of the US do not want to see America weaker. On the whole (with the exception of France) they welcome the US being the leader of the free world, but there is more to being a leader than bossing other countries around. Not to mention the complete pointlessness of needlessly insulting other countries just because they do not immediately fall into line. (Old Europe?!)
The rest of the world likes Obama, IMO, because they see in him the ideals of what they most respect about the US. A combination of the american dream, optimism of the ability to change the future for the better, the belief in rights of individuals and the intelligence to see the world in the grays that so clearly exist unlike the current incumbent.

The Brown 'endorsement' was just a mistake by a junior offical. It certainly did not sound like Brown's words, not nearly ambiguous enough. Oh and Brown is not quite the least popular prime minister, that was Major.

SwingVote:
No, because those you mentioned aren't libs and see through the ongoing barrage of European media attacks.

John:
And Major-who lasted as long as Brown will- was PM during the Clinton administration. Clinton was as much of a rock star to the Brits as Obama while he was being impeached.

Let's see who Tony Blair supports. His popularity has increased significantly since Brown took office. I guess you don't something's true worth until you lose it.

Even you libs are now touting the Reagan/Thatcher years. Lol.

NeverMetAnHonestCon

You are a projectionist encapable of a mutually respectful debate.

Obama called McCain out on how can he be an agent of change if he supports Bush's Core Policies. Are you able to explain it as McCain certainly can not.

@NeverMetAnHonestLib:

I think the probability that Brown will last 7 years (Major's term) to 2014, is pretty low. I really do not know what you mean by Clinton being a rock star to the Brits; he was president of the US for eight years, do you think the British media should have ignored him or the impeachment process?

Although Tony Blair would never make an offical endorsement he would almost certainly support Obama. He is center-left politican in Britain, hence would support the democratic platform on most issues. To give a few he is pro-choice, believes in universal health care, same-sex civil partnerships, and a much greater progressive tax system than exist in the US. The only issue off-hand I can think of that Blair would support McCain over Obama is the Iraq war.

The definition of liberal is completely different in Briain, but if you mean left, there are very few who would tout the Thatcher years.