Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: Obama 49, McCain 45 (ARG-10/18-20)

Topics: PHome

American Research Group
10/18-20/08; 1,200 LV, 3%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews

National
Obama 49, McCain 45

 

Comments
BOOMFAIL:

This Wacky pollster has been steady since about mid Spetember. No surge for McShame.

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/

____________________

Trosen:

National
Likely voters Aug 30-
Sep 1 Sep
6-8 Sep
13-15 Sep
20-22 Sep
27-29 Oct
4-6 Oct
11-13 Oct
18-20

McCain 43% 46% 48% 46% 45% 45% 45% 45%
Obama 49% 47% 45% 48% 49% 49% 50% 49%
Undecided 8% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6% 5% 6%

Not a whole lot of movement here.

____________________

Viperlord:

ARG is one of the weirdest, but it seems relatively stable. Oh, and from GaMeS at FiveThirtyEight:

"To keep the actual discussion going, here's a point a non-troll made earlier:


broberts said...

The lower income earner pays far more of their income, as a percentage, towards the essentials of life, however you may want to define them (typically food, shelter, clothing, health), than the higher income earner. This means that while their tax rate may be lower, it is actually a higher percentage of their income after essentials.


Nicely stated -- this is something the Repugs refuse to acknowledge in their specious flat-tax arguments.

Here's another way I would illustrate it: Imagine that a person has absolutely no possessions and no income, and there is no social network to provide aid. As long as this state persists, every waking hour will be spent on subsistence, i.e. acquiring basic sustenance and shelter.

Now, let's say that person finds a nice stash of food that provides more than necessary for survival, allowing some to be stored. He can now spend some time investing in himself -- building a better shelter, sharpening a new spear -- to make it easier to subsist. (You can also invest in yourself in the form of downtime, relaxing and recuperating both physically and mentally, making it easier to operate at peak capacity when needed -- ultimately, this is the origin of entertainment.)

This investment grows geometrically, making it easier and easier to survive while allowing a greater and greater share of his time to be spent on further investment. Put another way, investment is not directly proportional to income or wealth. A hunter-gatherer might spend 10% of his time on investment; a pastoralist might spend 20%; a farmer might spend 50%.

Now, it's pretty clear how this translates to modern life: The more money you have (in income and wealth), the greater percentage you're able to invest rather than simply spend on consumption (rent, food, car, etc.).

And where do taxes fit in? Well, by now it should be obvious: Taxes are investment in the nation. They pay for improvements in infrastructure, police, rescue, and so forth, making it easier to earn dividends in other pursuits. (For example, it's very hard to earn money in transportation if there are no good roads, and it's hard to keep your investments safe if there are no police.)

And before any of the right-wingers make a "free market" argument, even the dimmest free marketeer knows about economies of scale. It's not feasible to build just one lane of an interstate highway, or just enough military to protect your own house. (You either defend all the borders, or you're effectively defending none of them.)

So:
* We have the need to invest in public goods (i.e. nonexcludable, or nearly so) that are subject to economies of scale that make private ownership woefully inefficient.
* Individuals with greater resources spend a greater percentage on investment.
* Ergo, progressive taxation is the best way to handle these common needs. Since investment is nonlinear, so too must taxation be nonlinear.


And that's why the rich get larger tax bills. Any proposal for "flat taxes" is ultimately a case of either woeful lack of understanding or gross intellectual dishonesty.

Related note: This is also why the Reaganomics trickle-down concept doesn't work. Dollar-for-dollar, tax cuts given to the rich will be spent on things other than consumption. (Remember that my broad definition of "investment," in this context, includes luxuries and such.)

Since consumption drives demand, and demand is what makes suppliers willing to invest in greater capacity, tax cuts to the wealthy will have far less effect in a slow economy than tax cuts to the middle class and working class.

Now, why is it best not to give tax cuts to the wealthy in addition tax cuts for the middle and working classes? Well, you still need to pay the bills -- if you keep running up deficits, you devalue your currency (compare the US dollar to the Canadian dollar over the past few decades), and that is effectively a tax hike on everyone (and it disproportionately affects those who spend most of their income on consumption rather than interest-bearing investments).

Ah, but why not simply reduce spending and cut taxes for the rich? Well, that government spending creates jobs, closing a recessionary gap to reach full employment and efficiency in the economy. If you were to cut spending just to give a tax cut to the rich, unemployment would skyrocket, and now you have a real depression.

Proof?

Let's say that Y is the point at which you're in equilibrium (full employment, no recessionary gap from unemployment and no inflationary gap from overspending and scarcity). If you have an economy with, say, $2.5 trillion in fixed spending (essentially subsistence) and that spends 80% of discretionary income on consumption (the other 20% on savings), then you can solve for the point of equilibrium:

Y = $2.5T + 0.8(Y)
Y = $12.5T

Now, let's add government -- let's say you take out $3 trillion in taxes and spend the whole thing (balanced budget):

Y = $2.5T + 0.8(Y - $3T) + $3T
Y = $15.5T

See that? Even though you have a balanced budget, you're increasing the equilibrium income for the economy. If you're in a recessionary gap, this spending provides jobs and reduces structural unemployment.

Now, you don't want to overshoot or you create an inflationary gap, devaluing your currency. In fact, this is one reason that it's such a bad idea to run a really large deficit for a long period. Let's see what would happen if you only taxed $2.5 trillion instead of $3 trillion:

Y = $2.5T + 0.8(Y - $2.5T) + $3T
Y = $17.5T

See how that works? If your "full employment" level is less than $17.5 trillion, then your currency will devalue due to inflation; worse, you racked up $500 billion in debt, which will increase your necessary spending next year, accelerating the problem.

After a while, you have runaway debt -- which is pretty much where Bush & Co. have left us.

Now, it doesn't hurt to carry some debt, just as it doesn't hurt to have a mortgage ... if you can afford the payments. In fact, the best reason for deficit spending is to help pull out of a recession or depression -- but it has to be done carefully to avoid overshooting and wrecking your currency, and thus it's best not to cut taxes on the wealthy during such times. And if your debt is truly out of control, you must bring it back in line, even if it means raising taxes on the rich.


One last point that the Repugs love to overlook: Obama's budget costs $1.5 trillion less than McCain's, according to the Tax Policy Center. (Giving away $300 billion in tax cuts to the rich is essentially a massive earmark that provides welfare for the rich as the expense of a giant tax hike -- inflation -- on everyone else.) Therefore, Obama's plan results in smaller deficits (and thus less inflation) while simultaneously generating more jobs and higher employment rates with pay-as-you-go spending. Obama's plan is exactly what you should do during an economic downturn, and McCain's is a guaranteed trainwreck.


So, the next time some idiot right-winger starts spewing his talking points without having ever taken a class in economics, feel free to copy and paste this. =)"

____________________

Why isn't the new CBS/NYTimes poll that came out this morning being talked about? Obama is up by 13% in that poll!

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/20/opinion/polls/main4533712.shtml

____________________

DTM:

It is indeed somewhat amusing to look at a weekly tracker and see the relative lack of movement.

____________________

1503er:

Here's a good article about exit polling from Politico. It backs up what my belief was about the 2004 election. I distinctly remember that Kerry was 'going to win' the election throughout the day, based on these exit polls.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081021/pl_politico/14778

From the article:

"In theory, exit polls should match election results. But for all the care that goes into conducting accurate exit polls, errant results aren’t completely uncommon. Respected polling analyst Mark Blumenthal found that during the Democratic primaries this year, preliminary exit polls overestimated Obama's strength in 18 of 20 states, by an average error of 7 percentage points, based on leaked early results.

The reason? Obama’s supporters were younger, better educated and often more enthusiastic than Hillary Clinton's, meaning they were more likely to participate in exit polls."

It's my opinion that this problem doesn't exist just in the exit polls. I think it exists in these current national and statewide polls out now. I believe that Obama's support is being overstated by an enthusiastic base that is more willing to take surveys than say, the "Joe Plumbers" of the nation.

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

@OC_Manu

AMEN!
Notice how RCP keeps it off there average as well. Wouldn't want to show McShame losing any more ground.

____________________

Batony:

OK McCain will be in Colorado this week, so he is not giving up there.

____________________

sunnymi:


This pretty much says it all why Obama is still ahead in so many battleground states:

Approximately 72% of Obama's national ballot share of 49% comes from states where Obama leads. Approximately 39% of McCain's national ballot share of 45% comes from states where McCain leads.

____________________

boomshak:

Another poll showing a damned tight race.

"Why isn't the new CBS/NYTimes poll that came out this morning being talked about? Obama is up by 13% in that poll!"

That poll is such a rediculous outlier that RCP isn't even including it in the average. That is truly a slap in the face to CBS/NYTimes as they have always been included previously.

____________________

jamesia:

Every other pollster has shown a marked surge toward Obama earlier this month. The State polls from ARG were fishy too... Still, there's stability, which is good for Obama, not so much for McCain.

I'm still predicting a public wedding for Bristol Palin! There must be something drastic done by the McCain campaign. I imagine there will be lots of white flowers and real Americans.

____________________

illinoisindie:

I hope that its obvious to the Obama camp where McCain is going with his strategy, because its blatantly obvious to me. If he is abandoning IA,NM & CO… as crazy as it seems. The campaign internals tell them that PA is their best shot. Here’s why; as Carville put it PA has Alabama in the middle. Now PA is a great state for several reasons #1 is that there is NO EARLY VOTING and second of all I don’t care what the polls say right now, if McCain starts running against the Ayers/Wright ticket, and throw in bittergate, it will get traction there, hillary (thanks a lot) showed McCain the path…Heres the silver lining, (thank God) that Mr 4th from the bottom in his class figured it out with less than 2 weeks before the election, so he’s really running out of time. And hopefully Hillary beat Wright to death in the primary (the redeeming aspect of campaigning for that long). McCain probably may make PA closer, how close who knows. States like NC which are moving toward Obama with 40% of the white vote, can you believe it more than Kerry, McCain may halt some of the momentum. My hope is in that with Obama’s 50 state strategy has punched enough holes in the dyke walls that an 18 electoral vote combination of FL, IN, MO, VA, NV,NC will be blue on Nov 4th… doesn’t have to be deep blue… I’ll settle for sky blue, in case the unthinkable happens to PA.

____________________

sunnymi:


The one CBS/NYT came out last night was a follow-up poll asking the same voters before the 1st debate and after the 3rd debate their opinion of the 2 candidates. As such I do not think it can be included along with regular polls.

____________________

PortlandRocks:

boomshak idiot. The CBS poll yesterday was more of a STUDY group where they polled 400 or so people before the debate and after showing many swinging to Obama. It wasn't a national poll. FAIL.

____________________

BridgeportJoe:

That poll is such a rediculous outlier that RCP isn't even including it in the average. That is truly a slap in the face to CBS/NYTimes as they have always been included previously.

Sure, that's why RCP has decided not to include it.

The Battleground Poll is just as much as an outlier -- without it, the average margin would be 6.5, which is just as far from 1 as it is 13. Yet somehow RCP saw fit to include it!

They are a bunch of partisan hacks, no more and no less.

____________________

Nowukkers:

1503er:

I agree. This has always been my concern - that the news coming in was filtered not by the media but by the participants themselves. I remember the creeping, stultifying, wave of nausea overcoming me as the results came in and my realization that the exit polls were worth less than ****-house paper. I fear that there are a great many folks out there who have made their mind up and are not gonna tell nobody - and they're 90% reactionary and voting for McCain. I'm still optimistic, but tempered by a dose of heady realism.

____________________

PortlandRocks:

The problem with Mccain's strategy is that the "Alabama" part of PA isn't all that populated. HUGE turn outs in Philly and the burbs. 10% down? GOOD LUCK WITH THAT! ROFL

____________________

straight talk:

RCp is being biased! Look folks the race is between 5-7%. The best McCain can hope for is closing it to 3%. But it is all about State polls now!

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

Wow, so after the 3% MOE, McCain is at 48 percent, Obama is at 46. This means that McCain is 2% ahead nationally...WOW.

No wonder Obama is pulling the hail mary stunt of visiting his dying grandmother for a photo-op. He oughta be ASHAMED of himself to use her like this. It will ultimately backfire on him.

____________________

I've done some math... Based on early voting turnout demographics from the Georgia secretary of state, Obama should be currently winning the state by 2 points. Jim Martin should be winning by 5.7%.

The situation looks even better in North Carolina. Of course, those numbers might not hold up through election day, but if that's what's going on in deep-red Georgia of all places, imagine what's going on in the real battlegrounds. SurveyUSA's polls of states with early voting also show Obama running away with the early vote. How will McCain be able to make up Obama's massive early voting advantage on election day?

____________________

Batony:

The McCain Camp is getting ready to use Jeremiah Wright. They've been hinting at it, Republicans are furious they haven't used it yet...so here it comes.

____________________

IndependentThinker:

@boom****

Below is the reason why RCP dismisses the yesterday CBS poll, bottom line is there's no point of posting a poll that re-interviews 476 out of 518 people
Conclusion: It's the same as the one taken one week ago, hence its the same as the last week one and RCP is now posting polls taken in the past 3 or 4 days
--------------------------
This poll was conducted by telephone October 17-19, 2008 among 518 adults first interviewed by CBS News and the New York Times September 21-24, 2008. CBS News re-interviewed 476 registered voters for this poll. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus four percentage points. The error on measures of individual change is much smaller.

____________________

OGLiberal:

Even though it's ARG, they've shown a remarkably stable race over the past several weeks. Definitely good news for Obama given that he's been at 49-50 for at least the past month in this poll.

As for Rasmussen and Nates comments on his daily tracker. I like that he's a top-rated pollster. Why? Because he's shown a very stable race with Obama polling between 50-52 for almost an entire month, with McCain between 44-46. That's not a good thing for McCain. The internals are good for Obama as well - he's capturing the same amount of Dems as McCain is capturing Republicans. He trails McCain among men by only 2 and among white women by 1. He has an 11 point lead among women overall. His favorable rating is 55 with his very favorable rating at 41. And as noted above by another commenter, he know is seen as a better leader than McCain, 48-46.

Re: The CBS/NYTimes poll

I can't read the minds of the folks at RCP but I think they've excluded it because it's a unique poll. It's consists of a group of people - relatively few, maybe less than 400 - that they polled before the first debate and then re-polled after the third debate. There was huge movement to Obama among this group. But it wasn't really a true national poll. Still very good news for Obama but even I would agree that it shouldn't be included in the averages. It has nothing to do with it being an outlier or RCP wanting to shame the commie bastids at the NYTimes and CBS, as boom suggested.

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

Jesus, he's back.

____________________

DTM:

@1503er

The linked article actually explains why exit polls are different from pre-election polls. I would note as well that leaked exit polls tend to be preliminary, and thus even less reliable than completed exit polls. Finally, you might also note that on average Obama outperformed his pre-election polls during the primaries (there were some states both ways, but more states where he outperformed than vice-versa).

So, I agree people should ignore any leaked exit polls they may come across on Election Day. But there is little reason to believe that has anything to do with how to evaluate the pre-election polls.

____________________

BarackO'Clinton:

"The surge worked, my friends. Obama was agains the surge. And if you look at the polls, my friends, you will see THAT surge working too."

____________________

Pat:

@1503er:

That could be true except the following is true of a typical Obama supporter:

- Very busy, not at home most oftern
- Do not answer their phones or use voice mail to screen
- Many don't have lan lines and are cell phone users

I think because of these reasons Obama support is actually underestimated.

____________________

OneAngryDwarf:

@Batony

I agree with you. It seems to play into their strategy of using subtle racism in PA, OH and VA. Stuff like that wouldn't play well in CO, NM or NV and they seem to be pulling out of those states.

They are willing to accept defeat in the west to try and win the war in the east. I don't think it will work, but we shall see.

____________________

vmval1:

@Boomshak:

Now Boom, when you get in moods like these, you know what I say... Its OK... Hush now. Only 13 more days before gramps McCain becomes a footnote in history.

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

@Pat:
So we are supposed to be sympathetic for the fact that they are too lazy to get good jobs where they can be home in the evening, and can't afford landlands?

And why don't libs answer their phones???? probably because they are anti-social.

____________________

zen:


Arg is not reliable. many of their state polls were weird.
That being said, in any poll which doesn't include cell phone users, you have to give 3 percent more to Obama.
as far as I know, Gallup, and ABC/Wapo are including cell phone users.

____________________

mysticlaker:

@boomdoof

If this is not a 4-5% race on election day I will shocked. Any more, then McCain is looking at 1984, and if it's a 1-2% lead than we are looking like 1960.


____________________

sunnymi:

26 Newspapers That Backed Bush in 2004 Move to Obama

By Dexter Hill

Published: October 20, 2008 9:45 PM ET

NEWYORK Taking a look at our daily endorsement tally so far (see link below), the Obama-Biden ticket has a hefty lead in both total newspapers and total circulation. But another figure that favors the Democratic candidates is the number of newspapers that have endorsed Sen. Obama despite supporting President Bush’s reelection in 2004.

At least twenty-six newspapers have switched their support to the Democrat, while only four newspapers (all in the South) endorsing Sen. McCain supported John Kerry in 2004.

In California alone, the Obama-Biden ticket picked-up six newspapers that endorsed President Bush in 2004.

He also gained a few papers, such as the Los Angeles Times and Cleveland's Plain Dealer that did no endorse either candidate in 2004.

Our full tally of all endorsements, with Obama ahead by about 115 to 40, updated Mondayhere.

The switchers:

BARACK OBAMA (26)

CALIFORNIA
Long Beach Press Telegram (B): 85,595
Pasadena Star-News (B): 27,894
San Gabriel Valley Tribune (B): 40,051
The (Stockton) Record (B): 57,486
San Bernardino Sun (B): 54,315
Tri-Valley Herald (B): 29,759

COLORADO
The Denver Post (B): 225,193

CONNECTICUT
New Haven Register (B): 72,613

FLORIDA
Naples Daily-News (B): 66,272

ILLINOIS
Chicago Tribune (B): 541,663

INDIANA
Palladium-Item (Richmond) (B): 15,453

IOWA
Mason City Globe Gazette (B): 17,666

NEW JERSEY
Asbury Park Press (Neptune) (B): 140,882

NEW MEXICO
Las Cruces Sun-News (B): 21,341

NEW YORK
Daily News (B): 703,137

OHIO
Hamilton Journal-News (B): 19,432
The Repository (Canton) (B): 65,789
The Times-Reporter (New Philadelphia) (B): 22,428

OREGON
Yamhill Valley News-Register (McMinnville) (B): 10,921

PENNSYLVANIA
The Express-Times (Easton) (B): 44,561

TEXAS
Austin American-Statesman (B): 170,309
Houston Chronicle (B): 494,131

UTAH
The Salt Lake Tribune (B): 121,699

WASHINGTON
The Columbian (B): 44,623
Yakima Herald-Republic (B): 38,077

WISCONSIN
Wisconsin State Journal (Madison) (B): 87,930


JOHN McCAIN (4)

FLORIDA
Bradenton Herald (K): 48,618

TENNESSEE
The Jackson Sun (K): 32,121

TEXAS
Corpus Christi Caller-Times (K): 53,368

VIRGINIA
Daily Press (Newport News) (K): 91,508

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003875870

____________________

Pat:

@Batony:

McShame will look like **** if he starts attacking Obama with "Wright" stuff while he is visiting his sick grandmother. There goes this week. The best McShame can hope for is hitting him next week. I think that will be too late to change the race.

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

@Pat:
" Very busy, not at home most oftern
- Do not answer their phones or use voice mail to screen
- Many don't have lan lines and are cell phone users

I think because of these reasons Obama support is actually underestimated."

EXACTLY. Also, almost every poll DOES NOT count the newly registered person, or the person who didn't vote last time, but they are certain to vote this time. In most pollster models, these people don't count as a "LIKELY" voter. Notice how Gallup shows an 11 point Obama lead for Registered voters??? Very telling I would say.

Also, not sure how rasmussen polls, since I have personally never been polled after 1992, but if FOX/Rasmussen shows up on the caller ID, or the caller identified themselves as being from FOX, I would have to think that a lot of Democrats would just hang up or ignore the call.

____________________

"I can't read the minds of the folks at RCP but I think they've excluded it because it's a unique poll. It's consists of a group of people - relatively few, maybe less than 400 - that they polled before the first debate and then re-polled after the third debate. There was huge movement to Obama among this group. But it wasn't really a true national poll. Still very good news for Obama but even I would agree that it shouldn't be included in the averages. It has nothing to do with it being an outlier or RCP wanting to shame the commie bastids at the NYTimes and CBS, as boom suggested."
-----------------------------------------------
But RCP included the same CBS/NYTimes poll in their average two weeks ago when Obama was up by 14% in that poll!!

____________________

Viperlord:

True that.

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

@BOOMFAIL

Libs ignore Fox because they are fair & balanced.

____________________

Viperlord:

Fox is a far right, hideously biased network, and totally in the tank for McSame. Just like MSNBC is in the tank for Obama.

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

I am so sick of McCain running such a horrible campaign. PA? Cmon'! This is a clear sign of desperation. Sigh. I think people are right in that the GOP needs to go away for a while. My party has failed the American people BIG TIME.

____________________

Nowukkers:

alankeyesisawesome:
Libs are fair and balanced? Why thanks!

____________________

Pat:

@alankeyesisawesome:

You stupid ass. most professionals don't get home until late and then they have many priorities to attend to. Answering the phone and dealing with tele-marketers is not one of them. I phone banked a lot during the primaries for Obama and most of the people answering the phones were seniors.

____________________

Marcus:

@ alankeyesisawesome

"No wonder Obama is pulling the hail mary stunt of visiting his dying grandmother for a photo-op. He oughta be ASHAMED of himself to use her like this. It will ultimately backfire on him"

This statement of yours even if you are pretending over the top sometimes is really disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself. Stuff like this just plays into the stereotype that Repups never show empathy or are not capable of doing so. It really saddens me ..

We can always have differences about issues but some basic stuff should be common ground .. like tolerance and respect.

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

I have a bad feeling his strategy is to try to ignite a race war in the rustbelt states. NM CO and NV are done because people in the West are highly educated and won't go for it.:(

____________________

Viperlord:

I for one would probably ignore any major network calling me.

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

@Nowukkers
DO NOT TWIST MY WORDS AROUND!!! I meant fox!!!!!!!!!

____________________

sotonightthatimightsee:

YEEEEEEEEEEEEHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!

OVER? YOU WISH!

(*_*)

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

EVERYONE....

Note that "alankeysisawesome" is not me!!!! He is a liberal fraud posing as a conservative in order to discredit the conservative cause. Pay him no attention.

____________________

Chester:

@ alankeyes:
"No wonder Obama is pulling the hail mary stunt of visiting his dying grandmother for a photo-op. He oughta be ASHAMED of himself to use her like this. It will ultimately backfire on him"

You should be ashamed of yourself! This is the kind of **** that would make Lincoln and Reagan ashamed of what the Republican party has become!

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

I may just sit out this election. Maybe next time we will put up a real conservative like Romney the Mormon, not a liberal like McCain who can't run a campaign.

____________________

cambridge blue:

Good Gallup news.

No change in RV.

+1 in LV models for Obama.

____________________

sotonightthatimightsee:

"Why isn't the new CBS/NYTimes poll that came out this morning being talked about? Obama is up by 13% in that poll!"


Because everybody and their mother know it's crap!

____________________

Chester:
____________________

thoughtful:

HAVE WE GOT GALLUP YET?

____________________

Viperlord:

Lulz much?

____________________

KipTin:

Regarding this ARG poll: Pay attention to the voter ID.....

Democrats 41%
Republicans 32%
independent voters 27%

Compare to Rasmussen...
Democrat 39.7%
Republican 33.0%
unaffiliated 27.3%

Compare to Hotline....
Democrat 41%
Republican 36%R
Independent 18%
(So how is the other 5% allocated?)

____________________

OneAngryDwarf:

@alankeyesisawesome

BWAHAHAHAHAHAH

He is a liberal fraud posing as a conservative fraud in order to discredit the conservative cause. Pay him no attention.


I actually fell out of my chair laughing at that one.

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

@alan the retard

Which state are you from?

http://www.hakubi.us/simplyamerican/data/capsi/2004election_by_iq.png

Notice the ones Obama will turn BLUE this year are closest to the top.

____________________

vmval1:

Sweet - Gallup Traditional is now O+2 LVE is +10. We can safely say that GWU has a very clear agenda.

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

@Chester
I think that either one of those two would be ashamed that Americans are considering electing a COMMUNITY ORGANIZER with ties to terrorists instead of a war hero (that's McCain)

____________________

DTM:

Wow--we now have a fake version of what was already a parody posting on these boards.

____________________

Viperlord:

I'm STILL laughing.

____________________

Mike A.:

Gallup:

RV 52-41
LV Trad 51-44
LV Expanded 52-42

Yeah another poll showing this race is tight boomshack ;)

____________________

thoughtful:

North Carolina Civitas/TelOpinion (R) Obama 48, McCain 45 Obama +3

Confirms Rasmussen no wonder Boomshak is in hiding!

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

@BOOMFAIL

I'm from Nevada.

____________________

Viperlord:

I think almost every past US President would be disgusted by the Republican smear machine, personified by alan keyes.

____________________

Batony:

@Pat:

I just wonder if Obama going to visit his grandmother was strategic and also the announcement of it? I think they know JWright is coming and I think to your point, if McCain used while he was visiting his grandmother it wouldn't look good. We will see.

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

I live in Kentucky.

____________________

Mike A.:

@ Batony

strategic to visit his dying grandmother?!?!? omg you are riding the express train to hell...

____________________

bill kapra:

Gallup Numbers

RV 52-41
LVI 51-44
LVII 52-42

____________________

vmval1:

Nobody here actuaaly believes that alankeyesisawesome is actually Conservative right...?

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Sigh. McCain's a bastard candidate. I give up!

____________________

Viperlord:

Lol, I'm loving the parody party. And I'm sure Obama is going to see his grandmother because she's ill.

____________________

Chester:

@ Alan:
again with community organizers! War heros don't make nations, they only defend them. And McCain may be a war hero, but he sold his honour back in July when he crawled into bed with Steve Schmidt and the rest very people who smeared him in 2000.

I beleive that McCain could have won this. If he had retained his honour and chosen a more suitable running mate, people like Colin Powell would be lining up for him. The beautiful part about his tragedy is that he's done it to himself through his own ambition.. it's almost Shakespearean, actually.

____________________

Batony:

@Mike A:

Yes strategic...or he would have left immediately. Barack is a politician just like the rest. Don't underestimate strategy in anything a politician does.

____________________

Viperlord:

vmval: Of course not. He's obviously a tool of the Far Right's religious wing, which is anything but conservative.

____________________

thoughtful:

What is clear from Gallup and Rasmussen national trackers is that McCain/Palin are deep deep in quicksand. PA is going to sufocate them slowly in the most painful way.

I think it highly doubtful that McCain is going to risk using a real American military hero Sgt. Jerry Wright against Obama. If he does, it serves to underscore how very stupid McCain is.

____________________

KipTin:

Hey... vmval1... How could GWU Battleground poll have a "very clear agenda" when it is a joint effort by Republican and Democrat consultants? Just because you have a "clear agenda" does not mean that a pollster does.

From the GWU website: "The George Washington University Battleground Poll is a collaborative bi-partisan survey produced by Republican strategist Ed Goeas of The Tarrance Group and Democrat Celinda Lake of Lake Research Partners. This national polling program is unique to the industry, in that it offers the distinct perspectives of two top pollsters from different sides of the aisle."

------

____________________

Viperlord:

If you think Obama is visiting his grandmother for politics, your sick. The announcement was probably strategic, but it's not like he could have sneaked away now is it?

____________________

OneAngryDwarf:

@Batony & Pat

Yes this is a good way to avoid the J. Wright thing but there is a bigger issue with regards to Wright.

Isn't there a certain amount of cognitive dissonance involved with saying that Obama is a Muslim Terrorist who attended an American Christian Church? Just try and hold that picture in your mind for a moment. Juxtapose those islamic military camps in the desert with congregational hymns and Jesus prayer.

Easy sell to those that are completely sold already, really hard for an Independent thinker who is really honestly looking at the candidates. Maybe we don't see the good Rev. Wright because it would just throw off McCain's entire campaign arch.

On that same note why not let this guy talk:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/21/cnn-host-mystified-by-mcc_n_136479.html

Dude is a McCain support, a muslim and he just gave a positive human face to the McCain campaign by stopping a racist diatribe at a McCain/Palin rally. Yet they are more proud of Joe the "not really" plumber.

I just can't make heads or tails of this strategy, it is like they are trying to confuse voters by throwing out 40 different talking points each of which is a complete non sequitur to the one that immediately preceded it.

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

@Mike A.:

yes, it's strategic...remember, one of the biggest criticisms of Obama currently is that people don't see him as an empathetic figure (even though he would put the "pathetic" in "empathetic," lololol). I hope that the American public isn't stupid enough to buy it.

____________________

hou04:

FLORIDA (PPP)

Obama 48
McCain 47

____________________

Whoa! Gallop has Obama at 52 and McCane (not a typo - just that he is old) at 41 for today! WhooHoo! Just when I was feeling depressed, this cheered me up!

____________________

Batony:

The reason why JWright is an issue is b/c Obama stayed at the church for twenty years...then all of a sudden why he is running for Pres he decides to leave the church and throw the good Rev. under the bus.

The only reason McCain is not winning...is the economic crisis, his lack of an economic plan for the middle class, and his suspension of his campaign. If anyone is trying to blame anything else you are fooling yourself.

____________________

JoeThePlumber:

Viperlord: you can hit ctrl-c (this copies) and then hit ctrl p (this pastes)

Pasting soemone else's book is boring. Come up with your own thoughts.

____________________



Post a comment




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

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