Pollster.com

Articles and Analysis

 

US: Obama 50, McCain 42 (Ipsos-10/16-20)

Topics: PHome

Ipsos/McClatchy
10/16-20/08; 773 LV, 3.5%
Mode: Live Telephone Interviews

National
Obama 50, McCain 42

 

Comments
mandalorianarmy:

Funny, this is right in the middle of the pack today. Which is a very good thing :)

____________________

political_junki:

Also very encouraging to notice these votes are among ***L.V'S***

____________________

joethedummer:

WHAT A SURGE BY OBAMA TODAY, MONSTEROUS!

COLIN POWELL HAS MADE A BIG DIFFERENCE!

____________________

Timmeh:

This poll seems to be right about at Obama's average lead in the national polls today, which is slightly less than 8.

____________________

VA Yellow Dog:

My first post here. Great news all around for Obama/Biden in the polls today. This is my seventh presidential election in VA (moved here in 1980 from NY) and the first in which the Democrat has a shot at carrying VA.

As others have noted, though, whichever candidate we support, we all need to get out and do as much as we can between now and election day and DON'T FORGET TO VOTE (early and often, as my Chicago friends would say). This race is a long way from being over!

____________________

political_junki:

@VA Yellow Dog:
I dont know anybody from VA? Can you tell me what is your general feeling? like among people around you? Solid Obama lead makes sense to you as some one who lives there? (I hope yes)

____________________

boomshak:

SOMETHING THAT MAKES LITTLE SENSE:

I was just looking at Zogby's battleground states polling. It seems like every state McCain is within the MOE to Obama.

Yet, Zogby has Obama leading by 8 nationally.

That seems messed up to me.

Here are the details of the 10 states we surveyed.

States Moving from Undecided to McCain-Palin

Indiana (11)


McCain-Palin
52.8%

Obama-Biden
42.3%

Not Sure/Other
4.9%

Despite a big lead among independents, Obama appears unable to overcome the Republican enrollment advantage. So we make Indiana again red.

States Remaining for Obama

New Mexico (5)


Obama-Biden
46.1%

McCain-Palin
45.5%

Not Sure/Other
8.3%

McCain has gained since our last survey of New Mexico on Oct 9-13, closing the Obama lead among independents and doing better among Republicans than Obama is with Democrats. We will soon test the state again, and will wait for that to see whether a status change is called for.

Virginia (13)


Obama-Biden
49.7%

McCain-Palin
46.1%

Not Sure/Other
4.3%

Obama leads among independents and does slightly better among Democrats than McCain does with Republicans. Obama leads among all voters with family incomes under $100,000. Seniors go big for McCain.

States Remaining Undecided

Ohio (20)


McCain-Palin
49.3%

Obama-Biden
46.5%

Not Sure/Other
4.1%

McCain continues to hold a small lead in a state he must win. McCain leads by more than 10 among independents, Catholics and voters older than 50. Turnout will be especially important here in a state with early voting for President for the first time ever.

Colorado (9)


Obama-Biden
48.2%

McCain-Palin
47.9%

Not Sure/Other
3.9%

Loyalty to McCain from Republicans, who outnumber Democrats in Colorado, is keeping him toe-to-toe with Obama. However, Obama leads among independents by 19. McCain is also keeping it very close among voters ages 18-29.

Florida (27)


Obama-Biden
48.8%

McCain-Palin
45.2%

Not Sure/Other
6.0%

A double-digit lead among independents gives Obama a small lead. McCain counters with his advantages among religious voters and seniors. The race is even among Hispanics.

Missouri (11)


McCain-Palin
48.3%

Obama-Biden
48.0%

Not Sure/Other
4.6%

Both candidates run strongly with their base constituencies, and for now independents aren't breaking either way. So we have a tie.

North Carolina (15)


Obama-Biden
49.6%

McCain-Palin
46.5%

Not Sure/Other
3.8%

Large margins among independents and voters under age 35 join African-Americans to give Obama a small lead. North Carolina may have the nation's biggest gender gap. Men favor McCain, 57%-40%. Women choose Obama, 61%-36%.

New Hampshire (4)


Obama-Biden
46.5%

McCain-Palin
46.2%

Not Sure/Other
7.7%

Independents are tied and that is all you need to know. New Hampshire is too close to call.

Nevada (5)


McCain-Palin
51.5%

Obama-Biden
44.0%

Not Sure/Other
4.6%

This is a 7-point swing from our last interactive poll on Oct. 9-13. Obama's Democratic support has slipped, while McCain's Republican support has gone up. We'll keep Nevada undecided.

____________________

political_junki:

@BOOM:
Suddenly you want to make sense out of ZOGBY with all these polls?
loool Talk about desperate
ZOGBY is garbage:
I said it when it showed Obama only +2 and YOU WERE BIGGEST SUPPORTER OF ZOGBY.

I am saying it now,
ZOGBY IS GARBAGE.

____________________

johncoz:

@mandalorianarmy:
"Funny, this is right in the middle of the pack today. Which is a very good thing :)"

The "pack" (all polls, weighted average) for today is:

O 50.8/ M 42.6 / +8.3

With the clock running down, this can only be horrible news for McCain, even if the true spread is a point or so less (which it probably is). He is essentially back to where he was a week ago.

____________________

RussTC3:

12 different national polls today (using just one from each company if they released two--LV instead of RV unless LV was not available which was the case for ABC/Washington Post):

10/21/2008
Obama 50.1%
McCain 42.8%

Obama +7.3%

____________________

johncoz:

Boom,

you are correct there is something screwy -- but that's because the state polls you quote are Zogby Interactive - ie not at all comparable to his tracker, and renownedly the most inaccurate polls in the business.

Good try though :-)

____________________

mandalorianarmy:

Boom:

The reason for the discrepancy in the Zogby polls is that the Battleground polls are the very questionable "interactive online polls" that Zogby has been using all year.

The Reuters poll is a normal poll.

____________________

johncoz:

@RussTC3

Thirteen nationals today.

____________________

maddiekat:

Boom**** is quoting internet polls again.

____________________

John:

@Boomshak

The zogby national poll is a traditional phone live interviewer type albeit with the idiosyncrasy of using the 2004 party-id numbers. Their state polls are from a notoriously inaccurate internet poll, (Zogby Interactive). During the summer they had Obama up in Arizona and Barr winning 15% of the vote in NH.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Holy ****. I just got back. McCain getting destroyed nationally today or what?

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

McCain will take the commy lib muff-munchers down for all time!!!!

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Just today alone:

National NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Obama 52, McCain 42 Obama +10
National ABC News/Wash Post Obama 53, McCain 44 Obama +9
National Ipsos/McClatchy Obama 50, McCain 42 Obama +8
National IBD/TIPP Obama 47, McCain 41 Obama +6
National Pew Research Obama 53, McCain 39 Obama +14
National Rasmussen Reports Obama 50, McCain 46 Obama +4
National Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby Obama 50, McCain 42 Obama +8
National Hotline/FD Obama 47, McCain 41 Obama +6
National Gallup (Traditional)* Obama 51, McCain 44 Obama +7
National Gallup (Expanded)* Obama 52, McCain 42 Obama +10
National GWU/Battleground Obama 48, McCain 47 Obama +1

this is starting to turn so pathetic, we have boom clinging on to zogby INTERNET polls to make his case.

____________________

Michael:

ANOTHER DANG OUTLIER!!!!! Man, don't these people know it must be less than a 4-pt race, RASMUSSEN says so!!

____________________

IndependentThinker:

@boomSTUPID
The difference is that the Zogby nationwide poll is conducted in cooperation with Reuters/C-SPAN and the mode is Live Telephone Interviews
By contrast to the state-by-state polls conducted by Zogby whose mode is Internet which means the mode is GARBAGE that's why RCP is not taking it into account

____________________

carl29:

Did you hear the McCain is giving up on NH?

I also read something about Republicans in Georgia worried that McCain is "mistreating" the state.

____________________

deeznutsrepubs:

HEY REPUB TROLLS-

TICK TOCK

TICK TOCK

TICK TOCK

TICK TOCK

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

Best. Obama. Poll News Day. Ever.


Vote Baby Vote!

____________________

political_junki:

By the way guys look at this:
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=73cdcb54-f808-4353-adb7-2fd69b8e66aa

In NC among "ALREADY VOTED" Obama leads by 20%.
And 14% have already voted! How cool is that?

____________________

colivigan:

@political_junki:

I live in VA albeit not the "real" part. I'm in one of those communist northern VA suburbs.

I have a good feeling. There's a lot of Obama enthusiasm in the air. NoVA will definitely be blue, and I'm pretty confident in the state as a whole. We do have our share of "real American" areas, but there are also lots of college towns and population centers where Obama will own.

The Tidewater area with all those military families may be the big surprise. Obama resonates with those folks much better than the McCain campaign would like to think.

____________________

political_junki:

@colivigan:
Thank you for the info, it is always good to match the polls with the feeling of the people who live there :)

____________________

DecaturMark:

Voted today in GA. Had to wait 1 and 1/2 hours. I live in one of the few democratic areas of the Atlanta suburbs (Dekalb Co). There was still an hour and a half still in line when I left. McCain might win this state but he is going to have to come from behind to do it. Obama is already banking votes that he won't have to chase on Nov 4.

____________________

mandalorianarmy:

As I said on here earlier today and Nate Silver confirmed, it looks like some of the people pollster left out of the "likely" voter models voted in early voting and so they have to include them in their counts when they come up. If it's true, this polls will keep getting better.

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

McCain to dedicate ALL his resources to California, New York, PA, and FL now. McCain will sweep Cali and NY

____________________

Chester:

Even if M does actually surge, he's already up against big numbers that O has already accumulated in early voting... people who can't change their mind!

That's probably one reason why M has a hard-on for PA.. because with no early voting, he thinks he can still turn things around.

I think O should go to PA and have a couple of massive rallies, just to pull the last stringy hair out of the old man's head!

____________________

DecaturMark:

Do we really want this person to be VP. Wasn't Cheney bad enough:

"ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin charged the state for her children to travel with her, including to events where they were not invited, and later amended expense reports to specify that they were on official business.

The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel."

____________________

RussTC3:

johncoz
Here's what I saw today:

NBC/WSJ
IPSOS/McClatchy
ABC/Washington Post
IBD/TIPP
PEW
Gallup LVII
ARG
Hotline
Rasmussen
GWU
Research 2000
Zogby

Which am I missing?

____________________

SoloBJ:

Anyone see the video on McCain tonight at his PA rally? Palin apologized today for her "Pro-America" comment and now McCain goes there.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/

____________________

political_junki:

AP INVESTIGATION: Alaska funded Palin kids' travel

By BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE, ADAM GOLDMAN and MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writers
1 hr 19 mins ago
ANCHORAGE, Alaska – Gov. Sarah Palin charged the state for her children to travel with her, including to events where they were not invited, and later amended expense reports to specify that they were on official business.
The charges included costs for hotel and commercial flights for three daughters to join Palin to watch their father in a snowmobile race, and a trip to New York, where the governor attended a five-hour conference and stayed with 17-year-old Bristol for five days and four nights in a luxury hotel.
In all, Palin has charged the state $21,012 for her three daughters' 64 one-way and 12 round-trip commercial flights since she took office in December 2006. In some other cases, she has charged the state for hotel rooms for the girls.
Alaska law does not specifically address expenses for a governor's children. The law allows for payment of expenses for anyone conducting official state business.
As governor, Palin justified having the state pay for the travel of her daughters — Bristol, 17; Willow, 14; and Piper, 7 — by noting on travel forms that the girls had been invited to attend or participate in events on the governor's schedule.
But some organizers of these events said they were surprised when the Palin children showed up uninvited, or said they agreed to a request by the governor to allow the children to attend.
Several other organizers said the children merely accompanied their mother and did not participate. The trips enabled Palin, whose main state office is in the capital of Juneau, to spend more time with her children.
"She said any event she can take her kids to is an event she tries to attend," said Jennifer McCarthy, who helped organize the June 2007 Family Day Celebration picnic in Ketchikan that Piper attended with her parents.
State Finance Director Kim Garnero told The Associated Press she has not reviewed the Palins' travel expense forms, so she could not say whether the daughters' travel with their mother would meet the definition of official business.
On Aug. 6, three weeks before Republican presidential nominee Sen. John McCain chose Palin his running mate, and after Alaska reporters asked for the records, Palin ordered changes to previously filed expense reports for her daughters' travel.
In the amended reports, Palin added phrases such as "First Family attending" and "First Family invited" to explain the girls' attendance.
"The governor said, 'I want the purpose and the reason for this travel to be clear,'" said Linda Perez, state director of administrative services.
When Palin released her family's tax records as part of her vice presidential campaign, some tax experts questioned why she did not report the children's state travel reimbursements as income.
The Palins released a review by a Washington attorney who said state law allows the children's travel expenses to be reimbursed and not taxed when they conduct official state business.
Taylor Griffin, a McCain-Palin campaign spokesman, said Palin followed state policy allowing governors to charge for their children's travel. He said the governor's office has invitations requesting the family to attend some events, but he said he did not have them to provide.
In October 2007, Palin brought daughter Bristol along on a trip to New York for a women's leadership conference. Plane tickets from Anchorage to La Guardia Airport for $1,385.11 were billed to the state, records show, and mother and daughter shared a room for four nights at the $707.29-per-night Essex House hotel, which overlooks Central Park.
The event's organizers said Palin asked if she could bring her daughter.
Alexis Gelber, who organized Newsweek's Third Annual Women & Leadership Conference, said she does not know how Bristol ended up attending. Gelber said invitees usually attend alone, but some ask if they can bring a relative or friend.
Griffin, the campaign spokesman, said he believes someone with the event personally sent an e-mail to Bristol inviting her, but he did not have it to provide. Records show Palin also met with Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Goldman Sachs representatives and visited the New York Stock Exchange.
In January, the governor, Willow and Piper showed up at the Alaska Symphony of Seafood Buffet, an Anchorage gala to announce winners of an earlier seafood competition.
"She was just there," said James Browning, executive director of Alaska Fisheries Development Foundation, which runs the event. Griffin said the governor's office received an invitation that was not specifically addressed to anyone.
When Palin amended her children's expense reports, she listed a role for the two girls at the function — "to draw two separate raffle tickets."
In the original travel form, Palin listed a number of events that her children attended and said they were there "in official capacity helping." She did not identify any specific roles for the girls.
In July, the governor charged the state $2,741.26 to take Bristol and Piper to Philadelphia for a meeting of the National Governors Association. The girls had their own room for five nights at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel for $215.46 a night, expense records show.
Expense forms describe the girls' official purpose as "NGA Governor's Youth Programs and family activities." But those programs were activities designed to keep children busy, a service provided by the NGA to accommodate governors and their families, NGA spokeswoman Jodi Omear said.
In addition to the commercial flights, the children have traveled dozens of times with Palin on a state plane. For these flights, the total cost of operating the plane, at $971 an hour, was about $55,000, according to state flight logs. The cost of operating the state plane does not increase when the children join their mother.
The organizer of an American Heart Association luncheon on Feb. 15 in Fairbanks said Palin asked to bring daughter Piper to the event, and the organizer said she was surprised when Palin showed up with daughters Willow and Bristol as well.
The three Palin daughters shared a room separate from their mother at the Princess Lodge in Fairbanks for two nights, at a cost to the state of $129 per night.
The luncheon took place before Palin's husband, Todd, finished fourth in the 2,000-mile Iron Dog snowmobile race, also in Fairbanks. The family greeted him at the finish line.
When Palin showed up at the luncheon with not just Piper but also Willow and Bristol, organizers had to scramble to make room at the main table, said Janet Bartels, who set up the event.
"When it's the governor, you just make it happen," she said.
The state is already reviewing nearly $17,000 in per diem payments to Palin for more than 300 nights she slept at her own home, 40 miles from her satellite office in Anchorage.
Tony Knowles, a Democratic former governor of Alaska who lost to Palin in a 2006 bid to reclaim the job, said he never charged the state for his three children's commercial flights or claimed their travel as official state business.
Knowles, who was governor from 1994 to 2002, is the only other recent Alaska governor who had school-age children while in office.
"There was no valid reason for the children to be along on state business," said Knowles, a supporter of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. "I cannot recall any instance during my eight years as governor where it would have been appropriate to claim they performed state business."
Knowles said he brought his children to one NGA event while in office but didn't charge the state for their trip.
In February 2007, the three girls flew from Juneau to Anchorage on Alaska Airlines. Palin charged the state for the $519.30 round-trip ticket for each girl, and noted on the expense form that the daughters accompanied her to "open the start of the Iron Dog race."
The children and their mother then watched as Todd Palin and other racers started the competition, which Todd won that year. Palin later had the relevant expense forms changed to describe the girls' business as "First Family official starter for the start of the Iron Dog race."
The Palins began charging the state for commercial flights after the governor kept a 2006 campaign promise to sell a jet bought by her predecessor.
Palin put the jet up for sale on eBay, a move she later trumpeted in her star-making speech at the Republican National Convention, and it was ultimately sold by the state at a loss.
That left only one high-performance aircraft deemed safe enough for her to use — a 1980 twin-engine King Air assigned to the public safety agency but, according to flight logs, out of service for maintenance and repairs about a third of the time Palin has been governor.

____________________

boomshack:

Another prime example of MSM BIAS:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081021/ap_on_el_pr/palin_family_travel

Well of course she is going to charge Alaska for her kids travel! She has five kids, how else are they going to travel? She is the Governor of the ENTIRE STATE, so why shouldn't the state pay for their travel. Besides, that's a pretty good price she got.

____________________

jonny87:

@political_junki

about NC...susa has dems with only a 5 point id advanatage, when they actually have a 12.5 point registration advantage and this is how early voting is going...

2008
Party
Dem 56.1%
Rep 27.4%
No/Oth 16.5%

just a 5 point id advanatge is simply not based in reality

____________________

boomshack:

political_junki your post is too long and I am not going to read it.

____________________

RussTC3:

Palin obviously isn't sincere about here apology. She just said that PA is the most "God-loving," "patriotic" part of the USA, according to the ticker here on Pollster.com. That obviously means that she doesn't feel the same about the rest of the country, and that only those living in PA are patriotic.

____________________

mac7396:

Stop making fun of Gov. Palin. Her abuse of taxpayer money to pay for snowmobile spectating, is just a mavericky thing to do. This is just the kind of mavericky maverickness that is needed today in Washington.

____________________

boomshack:

Besides, Bristol, Willow and Piper could be anything. What's the point of naming your kids after inanimate objects if you can't bring them along as carry on?

____________________

RussTC3:

**Spelling correction: 'her', not 'here'

____________________

maddiekat:

The maverick is all over the news tonight.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html

____________________

metsmets:

MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD UNCOVERD IN PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CALIFORNIA

The form had been filed by a voter registration organization called YPM, which stands for Young Political Major. Any time a voter reregisters with the county, whether because of an address change or a move to new party affiliation, the registrar's office is obligated by law to send out a notification to the registered voter. Hofstetter never received such notification and filed a complaint with the Secretary of State's office.

Meanwhile, YPM activities have been brought under scrutiny in Riverside and San Bernardino counties. San Bernardino County Democrats recently demanded an investigation by the local district attorney when they discovered in a poll that 27 of 33 formerly registered Democrats they contacted were "shocked" to find that their party affiliation had been switched to Republican, according to local news accounts.

Hector Barajas, spokesman for the California Republican Party, confirmed that YPM was hired to work for the GOP in California, and had been issued thousands of voter registration forms. But he insisted that there are in place several verification procedures to ensure that any voter registrations filed are valid.

DONT YOU GUYS KNOW CALIFORNIA ISNT A BATTLEGROUND STATE???


THE

____________________

SoloBJ:

@RussTC3,
It was McCain who said that at his PA rally tonight. I had to laugh at the "I couldn't agree more" line that came out all wrong.

____________________

boomshack:

political_junki:

By the way guys look at this:
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=73cdcb54-f808-4353-adb7-2fd69b8e66aa

In NC among "ALREADY VOTED" Obama leads by 20%.

There is something very screwy with the numbers in that poll. They do not add up to an integer. Besides, Republican voters are older, and it takes them a lot longer to get to the polls, so many of them have not even voted yet. There will be A HUGE SURGE for McCain by Sunday. The polls will be tied. Then, I will let you in on a secret, on Nov. 4th there is a BIG SURPRISE.

____________________

johncoz:

@RussTC3

Ah! I have followed 538 in including the CBS re-interview (n=327). But that actually came out yesterday. So you are correct; I will delete from my figures.

Thanks.

____________________

metsmets:

@Boomshak

There will be A HUGE SURGE for McCain by Sunday.

Any particular Sunday? Or is this a generic Sunday?

____________________

maddiekat:

November 5th Palin is going to say can me and my kin keep the clothes and McCain will respond by saying you betcha!

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14805.html

____________________

johncoz:

@boom
"Republican voters are older, and it takes them a lot longer to get to the polls"

I think that is wrong. Older voters have been historically the most likely group to opt for early voting.

____________________

political_junki:

boomshack:
You are not even funny anymore and arguing with you is not even challenging anymore.
Too bad you became desperate so fast, I thought you will have enough ammo to keep you going till Nov.4 but already you have taken refuge in "Secret memos from Obama camp"
Poor BOOM...

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

McCain will steal Cali from the commy lib muff-munchers.... McCain/Palin 08 - Whatever It Takes!

____________________

johncoz:

boom, boom, boom ...

Surely you have been burned enough times on the "tied by Sunday" line.

I do admire your fortitude though, buttercup.

____________________

DecaturMark:

Solo

Did you hear how quiet the crowd got as McCain was stumbling through that juicy mistake? It magnified the error. He had a great set up line and then blew it. Priceless.

____________________

boomdoom:

Watch what McShame thinks about PA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLVSURlFoQs

____________________

boomshack:

johncoz:

@boom
"Republican voters are older, and it takes them a lot longer to get to the polls"

I think that is wrong. Older voters have been historically the most likely group to opt for early voting.

Obviously you are confusing your demographics. The abstentee registration tends to favor Republicans, and that's the early voting you are thinking about because Republicans have more money and travel more and are more busy in general. But with the early voting, a lot of Republicans are now in wheelchairs, and you are forgetting that. Wheelchairs in general take longer to get around in. Of course it depends on a wheelchair.

Republicans also need more time to weigh their voting decision because they take their vote seriously. This year especially many Republicans are extra slow to come to McCain's side because he is such a maverick. That slow speed is reflected in all the polls.

Even if you compare an elephant and a donkey, a donkey would be a lot faster than an elephant because an elephant is larger and it takes him more time to get there.

____________________

mysticlaker:

@boom

There will be A HUGE SURGE for McCain by Sunday
--------------------------------------
This is getting boring...At least choose a new day that I can look forward to mocking you...
--------------------------------------
Boom, what is background? What's your career or educational speciality?

____________________

SoloBJ:

@DecaturMark:
It was priceless! Gave me a great laugh tonight watching that clip. He totally screwed that line up.

____________________

political_junki:

@boom:
Republicans are lucky they have a moderate like McCain there, if somebody like Romney was on top of the ticket he would have been crushed by more than 25% by now...

____________________

boomshack:

johncoz:

boom, boom, boom ...
Surely you have been burned enough times on the "tied by Sunday" line.

I do admire your fortitude though, buttercup.

You know, I am doing the very best I can here, all alone against all of you liberals. I am the last bastion of Pro-American America left here. You could show me a little respect and a little tolerance. I have to type like ten times faster than the rest of you just to keep up, ever think of that? Plus it takes me longer to think. Have some compassion, man. I thought you libs are supposed to be all sensitive and compassionate and stuff? What happened to that?

____________________

johncoz:

boom,

I had to read that twice, and I laughed even louder the second time. Have you really been a parody troll all this time?

I particularly love: "Even if you compare an elephant and a donkey, a donkey would be a lot faster than an elephant because an elephant is larger and it takes him more time to get there."

____________________

mac7396:

"There will be A HUGE SURGE for McCain by Sunday."

Dude, you said that last week. The only surge was for Obama after the great endorsement from Gen. Powell.

____________________

political_junki:

@boom:
We all lrespect you man. You just get annoying sometimes. It is all for good fun otherwise none of these discussions changes anything.
Honestly I get a kick out of pissing you off as well, same way you get a kick out of pissing off others :)

____________________

DecaturMark:

@Boom

I do have to say that you explanation of why older voters and republicans vote late was some of your best BS. I just thought you could use a compliment.

____________________

boomshack:

mysticlaker:

@boom
Boom, what is background? What's your career or educational speciality?

FAIL!
As if I was going to tell you where I work or what I do. For all you care, I could be in business repairing wheelchairs, if that helps you.

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

all you commy libs are FAIL

McCain - Palin 08, Whatever It Takes!

____________________

RussTC3:

No prob, johncoz. :)

Heh, McCain agrees with Murtha:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLVSURlFoQs

____________________

boomshack:

johncoz:

boom,

I had to read that twice, and I laughed even louder the second time. Have you really been a parody troll all this time?

I particularly love: "Even if you compare an elephant and a donkey, a donkey would be a lot faster than an elephant because an elephant is larger and it takes him more time to get there."

Because of stupid campaign from McCain, the Republican brand might be forever damaged. I wouldn't be at all surprised if in time for 2012 Palin/Romney ticket, the GOP did away with an elephant as its symbol, and rebranded itself with something more slick and agile for the 21st century, like a zebra or a bunny rabbit. Or a Jesus fish.

____________________

marctx:

These polls are really going Obama's way. If this is not a 3-4 point race by next Tuesday it's over.

I thought Matthews did a pretty good job of making the accusation that some people are anti-american is in itself an anti-american statatment. good stuff.

So, Obama supporters you can stay home, it's in the bag.

____________________

mac7396:

Yes, for we know Boom is an unlicensed wheelchair repairman that will someday buy his boss's business on his $40,000/yr salary, but only after he catches up on back taxes.

____________________

mahlers5th:

Internals in PA are not looking good (for Obama) and Rendell wants him to come back. If McCain wins PA, Obama can win VA and still lose. Closer than it looks.

____________________

boomshack:

DecaturMark:

@Boom
I do have to say that you explanation of why older voters and republicans vote late was some of your best BS. I just thought you could use a compliment.

Thank you. I would like to return the favor and compliment you on your best post of the day too. The one where you compliment me.

OWN!

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

Stay home Obama supporters, but if you don't, remember McCain will win anyway. McCain/Palin 08, Whatever It Takes!

____________________

ticketstub:

Everyone realizes that there's a joke "boom"and "alankeyes" on here, right? With slightly different screennames?

____________________

boomshack:

marctx:

These polls are really going Obama's way. If this is not a 3-4 point race by next Tuesday it's over.

Traitor! Did you see the Battleground poll? One point! Florida and Ohio are up for grabs, NV is yellow and now with a leaked news, PA is within two points! This is no time for you to run!

____________________

boomdoom:
____________________

Pat:

@boomshack:

Are you serious with the Palin/Romney ticket????

Why would you want Palin at the top of the ticket if she has been such a disaster as a VP candidate? She is the reason McShame is so far behind.

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

Don't mess with my boomy. He's my homoy... he's my dog. He know the commy lib muff munchers can't compete against McCain's suppresionisism. McCain/Palin 08, Whatever it takes!

____________________

boomshack:

Pat:

@boomshack:

Are you serious with the Palin/Romney ticket????

Why would you want Palin at the top of the ticket if she has been such a disaster as a VP candidate? She is the reason McShame is so far behind.

Governor Palin is energizing the Republican base. It is hard for you to understand that, but you have to bring the base together first. If you do not have a base, you are building your house on top of nothing. Sarah Palin is the face of the New Republican Party, and Mitt Romney, continuing the metaphor, is its brains. What better combination, than a pretty face with a great brain?

____________________

political_junki:

@boom
2012: Romney/Palin ticket
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

What a joke that is gonna be, lol.

I cant wait :)))

____________________

marctx:

boomshack:

"marctx: Traitor! Did you see the Battleground poll?"

Yes, I did and I was hopeful until I saw the rest of them.

I voted for a republican today for the first time in my life!

I am just facing reality. I will cheer and stay up all night if necessary on Nov 4th if this race tightens to 3-4 points. If not, what are we spinning here.

I was a little hopeful with the Biden comments. Those comments are the reason I don't support Obama. I think our enemies will be stronger and attack us under Obama.

____________________

boomshack:

mac7396:

Yes, for we know Boom is an unlicensed wheelchair repairman that will someday buy his boss's business on his $40,000/yr salary, but only after he catches up on back taxes

Or I could be a college professor teaching wheelchair repair in the Research Triangle. You will never know, though!

____________________

mac7396:

Yo Western Pa. Some people have been saying you're racist rednecks. I couldn't agree with them more or disagree with you more. Or disagree with myself more. You're the most patriotic god loving patriots that have ever disagreed with God.

I'm John McCain and I approved this message.

____________________

political_junki:

@marctx:
From your nickname, if you are from Texas, who you voted for doesnt matter :)
You could have voted for yourself for all anybody cares!

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

Commy lib muff-munchers will never steal back this election!!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

____________________

boomshack:

marctx:

boomshack:

"marctx: Traitor! Did you see the Battleground poll?"

Yes, I did and I was hopeful until I saw the rest of them.

I voted for a republican today for the first time in my life!

It is too late to apologize!
See if you can vote again.

____________________

political_junki:

@boom:
"Governor Palin is energizing the Republican base. It is hard for you to understand that"

You are a smart guy why do you say stupid things?

Has any party in US ever won just by energizing his base? Independents are running away from McCain because of her. Go read any of todays polls

____________________

muckinello:

Very disappointing day for Obama :(
Did you see the polls???

McCain still leading in Wyoming, Oklahoma, Kentucky and South Carolina!

We lost it folks!

____________________

Basil:

I was on another thread, but BooBoo's here...


Help! I want to be a moonbat for halloween but I don't know what one looks like!

I've tried looking in the mirror but all I see is someone who looks the same as an increasingly large majority of Americans--and I'm not gaining weight.

Are we a nation of moonbats? Do we whine at the moon? Are moonbats something Rush saw in an Oxycontin hallucination? (If so, I'm sorry I wasn't flittering around with my fellow moonbats slurping up Rush's cholesterol-rich blood.)

Inquiring minds want to know, BooBoo!

____________________

political_junki:

@BOOM
This is from WSJ not me:
------------------------------------------------
The poll finds that his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain, still holds the edge on experience, and most voters remain convinced he is better prepared for the White House than Sen. Obama is. But that argument is undercut by concerns about the readiness of his running mate, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, whose popularity has faded.

____________________

boomshack:

political_junki:

@boom:
"Governor Palin is energizing the Republican base. It is hard for you to understand that"

You are a smart guy why do you say stupid things?
Has any party in US ever won just by energizing his base? Independents are running away from McCain because of her. Go read any of todays polls

I did not say the base is where it stops. The base is where it starts. That was the mistake McCain made. He never solidified his base in time. With Governor Palin in charge we are starting with a solid base. And then Mitt Romney piles ON TOP of that with his economic expertese and such. And what a great looking ticket that would be! Do you realize that most people vote based mostly on looks?! That's really why Obama is winning - look at how frail McCain looks. Christ, he looks like a zombie half the time! With Palin/Romney as GOP ticket, the libbers will have an impossible time matching the appreance of the ticket.

____________________

mac7396:

Breaking...major cuts in ad spending by McCain in CO, NH, WI, MN, and ME. He's in full retreat and waving the white flag of surrender.

____________________

Ryguy:

hes retreating into PA... a state that obama holds steadily is where this battle will end. bring it on mccain!

____________________

marctx:

political_junki:

"@marctx:From your nickname, if you are from Texas, who you voted for doesnt matter"

I know that kinda bummed me out too.


____________________

JoeThePlumber:

Does voting early give you bonues points? I love the "We voted early so we're gonna win" mentality.

The polls have you so far ahead you can all stop voting now. It's in the bag. ;)

____________________

boomshack:

Basil:

I was on another thread, but BooBoo's here...
Help! I want to be a moonbat for halloween but I don't know what one looks like!

I've tried looking in the mirror but all I see is someone who looks the same as an increasingly large majority of Americans--and I'm not gaining weight.
Are we a nation of moonbats? Do we whine at the moon? Are moonbats something Rush saw in an Oxycontin hallucination? (If so, I'm sorry I wasn't flittering around with my fellow moonbats slurping up Rush's cholesterol-rich blood.)

Just because Rush Limbaugh could not keep the weight off because he had to quit oxy cottons cold turkey, is no reason to bring him up or make fun of him. He is a suffering man.

Here is how you make a moonbat for Halloween, Basil. (Halloween is a pagan ritual, and no brother in Christ ought to participate in that). But if you are already a heathen, then by all means.

Take a baseball bat and drill a hole in it that looks like a full moon. Voila! You have your moonbat. Any other questions?

____________________

shirefox:

I agree with joethedrummer. It looks like the Colin Powell effect is and will be enormous. The Powell Surge.

____________________

jeepdad:

I bet McCain wished the RNC hadn't spent $150,000 on clothes and makeup for Palin. He could use it right about now.

____________________

McShame:

A true classic.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1008/ProAmerican_America.html#comments

Put two more on the gaffe-o-meter.

____________________

Pat:

@boomshak,

"Sarah Palin is the face of the New Republican Party, and Mitt Romney, continuing the metaphor, is its brains"

This is such a funny line. I almost dropped out of my chair. But seriously, the problem with Palin is that she does not have a brain. I think the country is done with brain-less Presidents like bush.

____________________

political_junki:

@boom
"Do you realize that most people vote based mostly on looks?That's really why Obama is winning"

That is the most absurd pathetic thing you have ever said, and you have said a lot of them!
Although it shows a lot the "Depth" of your political knowledge :)
With people like you 2012 keeps looking easier and easier :)))

"With Palin/Romney as GOP ticket, the libbers will have an impossible time matching the appreance of the ticket."

LOOOOOOOOOL
Man, you are a blast!

____________________

boomshack:

JoeThePlumber:

Does voting early give you bonues points? I love the "We voted early so we're gonna win" mentality.

The polls have you so far ahead you can all stop voting now. It's in the bag. ;)

With all due respect, you are an idiot. And I take the respect part back.

____________________

Pat:

New York times reports that people who monitor advertising spending now put at five the number of states where Senator John McCain is reducing his advertising – New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Colorado, Maine and Minnesota.


____________________

political_junki:

"Sarah Palin is the face of the New Republican Party"

I can see Democrats using this line in an Ad against Republicans and it is gonna work big time.
BOOM: I am still not convinced you are not a Democratic Plant in this forum!

____________________

JoeThePlumber:

Boom: Say it ain't so. I have given you nothing but respect here. I have supprted you from day one. Why turn on me. I was being facecious

____________________

falcon79:

@boomshack:
hahahah awesome stuff today man... truly, some of your most priceless bs was unloaded today LMAO
i especially like the analogy of the elephant and the donkey
HAHAHAHAH
:D

____________________

boomshack:

jeepdad:

I bet McCain wished the RNC hadn't spent $150,000 on clothes and makeup for Palin. He could use it right about now.

That is SEXIST!
There is no reason WHATSOEVER why McCain can't share makeup with Palin.

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

So, having boomshak as a tiny penis owner wasn't enough, now we have to put up with an even smaller penis owner / attention starved boomshack??


Vote Baby Vote

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

You commy libs just wait, once we get done with your voter rolls, this will be a landslide for McCain/Palin 08.,

Whatever It Takes!

____________________

boomshack:

political_junki:

BOOM: I am still not convinced you are not a Democratic Plant in this forum!

Is this a not-so-subtle reference to Robert Plant?

By the way, please explain to me why it is wrong for a politician to actually be pretty? It is a well known fact that JFK was elected largely based on his good looks. I happen to think that Mitt Romney is every bit as good looking, if not more. I think Mitt is WAY better looking than JKF. And Palin is just HOTTTTT. She is like young Cindy McCain. I can certainly see why John McCain picked her!

____________________

muckinello:

I wellcome a Palin/Romney/Huckabee ticket. The more to the right the rethugs go the better it is for us. With 70% of the first time voters going DEM that's a block that is here to stay.
Ron Paul would have much more cross-party appeal, or someone like Michael Bloomberg. But the rethugs are to dumb and too tied with the religious zealots to grab that chance.

____________________

boomshack:

falcon79:

@boomshack:
hahahah awesome stuff today man... truly, some of your most priceless bs was unloaded today LMAO
i especially like the analogy of the elephant and the donkey
/giggling deleted/

Of course with an animal moniker you'd appreciate it.

____________________

political_junki:

@BOOM:
Do you remember you were excpecting votes to tighten after VP Debate?
You used to think since she has managed to finish 3 sentences she had memorized, correctly people are going to move to McCain en-masse!
Every now and then read your last posts, you will be surprised how good they stand the test of time ;-)
They will also help you re-evaluate your poliitical knowledge!

____________________

cbeckham:

The Futility of Class Warfare


By Bradley R. Schiller

Why “us” versus “them” doesn’t sell

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The “race card” was once an effective ploy in electoral politics. Southern Democrats long used it to rally white voters. In the wake of the civil rights movement, the Republicans took possession of the race card. Nixon used it to strike fear in the minds of white voters, helping to transform a solid South into a Republican bastion. That card still gets played on occasion. But with white voters receding into the minority in so many jurisdictions, the race card is increasingly viewed as not just an unfair play, but an inefficient one as well (as Hillary Clinton learned).

The preferred ploy of Democrats these days is the “class” card. Democrats have increasingly tried to redefine the “them vs. us” struggle in terms of class rather than color. As they tell the story, economic prosperity is a zero-sum game. Income gains attained by the “rich” come at the expense of the “poor.” Corporations bestow lavish compensation on executive insiders while cutting salaries, benefits, and jobs for hard-working Americans. A massive flow of campaign contributions assures that elected officials will protect and serve the rich, while simultaneously cutting holes in the social safety net. Tax cuts for the rich not only fuel conspicuous indulgence among the elite, but diminish spending on health services, school, and the safety of the poor. It all boils down to “them” (the rich) vs. “us” (the poor and middle class).

All three candidates for the Democratic party nomination played the class card. John Edwards was the most blatant, enshrining his “Two Americas” vision as the central platform of his campaign. That vision became blurred in the glare of his multi-million dollar mansion and $400 haircuts. Hillary Clinton picked up the Two Americas theme, tirelessly railing against the Bush “tax cut for the rich” while bemoaning the stagnation of the working class. Even though she donned working-class duds and even sipped beer in a tavern, her credibility as the standard-bearer for the middle class was not helped by the revelation that she and Bill had taken in over $100 million in just five years. The “class card” has been passed to Barack Obama. He has used it relentlessly to enlist and energize his supporters. In fact, he has made the Bush tax cuts one of the central contrasts between his and McCain’s policy platforms. Ending the Iraq war and reversing the Bush tax cuts, Obama promises, will cure all of America’s problems.

Republican rebuttals

The republican rebuttals to the “tax-cuts for the rich” charge have been anemic. President Bush himself has emphasized that the 2001–03 tax cuts were a timely and much needed stimulus to an economy that was in recession at that time. A “reversal” of those tax cuts would now constitute a tax increase that the macro economy can ill afford. With the economy barely treading water amid vast uncertainty in the financial sector, the weight of a tax increase on aggregate spending could easily plunge the economy into the depths. Even the expectation of a tax increase could put a damper on spending plans, as both Bush and McCain have stressed.

Virtually every economist in the land would agree with these macro assessments. Liberals would have preferred more progressive tax cuts — or even increased social spending — as stimulus tools. But there is no question that the Bush tax cuts were stimulative and that ending them would have a contractionary impact on the economy. Unfortunately, the intricacies of macro theory don’t resonate with the general public. There is still a tendency to view the tax take-back as a free lunch, paid for by the overindulgent and undeserving rich. So the otherwise compelling macro agreement for leaving the tax cuts in place doesn’t win the electoral pr battle.

The second Republican rebuttal is equally true but just as anemic. President Bush has argued repeatedly that the 2001–03 tax cuts were proportionately greater for the middle class than the rich. In percentage terms, he is absolutely right. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Bush tax cuts reduced middle-class tax bills by an average of 15 percent. By comparison, high-income taxpayers — those in the top 20 percent of the income distribution — got only a 10 percent tax break.

Although accurate, this percentage distribution of tax breaks fails to repel the Democrats’ contention that the Bush tax cuts overwhelmingly favored the rich. The Democrats have successfully portrayed the distribution of tax breaks in absolute terms rather than percentages. They note that the rich got an average tax break amounting to $30,000 for the years 2001–10, while the middle class got an average tax break of only $5,400. Low income households got a measly $744. Those are the kinds of statistics that capture voters’ attention.

The simple arithmetic of tax burdens explains the enormous difference in tax breaks. The richest 20 percent of U.S. households pays a whopping 86 percent of federal income taxes. Their average tax bill amounts to $34,000. By contrast, the middle class (middle quintile) pays only 4.5 percent of federal income taxes, with an average bill of only $2,000. Low-income households, on average, pay nothing. Since people who pay little or no taxes can’t really get a further tax break, tax cuts must overwhelmingly favor the rich.

The arithmetic of tax cuts doesn’t get much pr traction. Yet, the Democrats still haven’t won the game with their class card. Opinion polls not only register continued opposition to tax hikes in general, but also substantial skepticism about raising taxes on the rich. Remarkably, the public is even overwhelmingly opposed to raising the federal estate tax — a levy that truly affects only the very richest U.S. households.

The truth about economic class

What frustrates theDemocrats’ use of the class card is the fluidity of class boundaries in the United States. Successful use of a splintering card requires a clear delineation between “them” and “us.” The race card has a physiological advantage in that regard. But the class card has no such evident demarcation. First of all, perceptions of “rich,” “poor,” and “middle class” keep changing. Luxury items that were once hallmarks of the rich often evolve into “necessities” for the middle class (e.g., flat-screen tvs, global positioning systems, even air conditioning). Second, and more importantly, the ranks of the “rich” and “poor” keep changing. With the exception of Michael Jackson, people rarely change their color — or even try to. But people do change their economic status with amazing frequency. So it’s never entirely clear who’s with “them” and who’s with “us.” Which makes it very difficult to wage class warfare.

Escaping Poverty. Democrats want us to believe that a large section of the U.S. population is trapped in poverty and/or toiling at minimum wages just above official poverty lines. This is presumed to be the core constituency of the “us” team — the people who are permanently left behind as the economy grows and incomes of the rich rise to dizzying heights.

Superficially, the notion of a permanent underclass appears to have some credence. When George Bush took office, there were roughly 33 million poor Americans. Since then, the economy has grown by more than 20percent. But the government itself still counts over 37 million Americans as poor. So it looks like all the benefits of economic growth went to “them,” not “us.”

Two out of every three households that fall into poverty in any given year escape poverty the following year.
But this impression is deceiving. First of all, the U.S. population keeps growing. In the last eight years alone, the U.S. population has increased by more than 20 million people. So there are more people at every point in the income distribution, including its lowest points. What really matters is the incidence of poverty in this growing population. By that measure, poverty increased only modestly between 2001 (11.7 percent) and today (12.5 percent).

Any increase in the incidence of poverty is unwelcome. But much of that increase was fueled by immigrants. Every year at least 1 million immigrants enter the United States, both legally and illegally. Most come seeking work and higher pay. Overwhelmingly, they enter our labor markets at the low end of the wage scale. They are “poor” by American standards even if significantly better off than they were in their home countries. Since Census surveys don’t differentiate between legal and illegal immigrants, these immigrants become part of America’s poverty population. As homeland security concerns have tightened border security, these poor immigrants have remained in the United States longer (rather than risk multiple entries). The incidence of poverty among immigrants is about 25 percent higher than among nonimmigrants.

The influx of immigrants into the poverty population creates substantial churn in the “us” ranks. As past immigrants climb out of poverty or return home, they create a net outflow from the “us” ranks. This outflow is augmented by the ever-changing circumstances of the native-born poor. People fall into poverty for a variety of demographic and economic reasons. Job loss, divorce, and injury top the list of poverty-creating forces. Even in the best of economic times, these forces push people into poverty. But they don’t necessarily keep people in poverty. Divorced moms hook up with new partners. Dependent children grow up. Unemployed workers find jobs. Injuries heal. So there is a constant outflow of poverty households as well. In fact, two out of every three households that fall into poverty in any given year escapepoverty the following year. In other words, most American poverty is temporary, not permanent. Less than 2 percent of America’s poverty population is poor for as many as ten consecutive years.

Moving up from minimum wage. Another rallying point for the class-warfare strategists is the minimum wage. Democrats decry the fact that the federal minimum wage stays so far below average wages. Even with the recent wage hikes (to $6.55 this July, $7.25 next year) minimum-wage workers won’t be able to keep a family of four out of poverty. Working long hours at such dead-end jobs supposedly solidifies the position of minimum-wage workers in the “us” ranks.

A subset of jobs in the U.S. labor market will always pay low wages; but few workers get stuck in those jobs.
The assignment of minimum-wage workers to the ranks of the downtrodden is at odds with the realities of minimum-wage experience. Most young people do in fact have first jobs that pay wages at (or below!) the federal minimum wage. Even Brad Pitt started at that level, hawking fast food in a chicken costume. But those entry-level jobs don’t last long. Two out of three minimum-wage entrants are consistently earning wages above federal thresholds within two years of labor-market entry. After three years, only 15 percent of minimum-wage entrants are still toiling away at such low wages. There may be a subset of jobs in the U.S. labor market that will always pay low wages; but few workers get stuck in those jobs. The low-wage entrants into the “us” ranks move out and up. The few who stay at dead-end jobs are by far the exception, not the rule.

Rags to Riches? The relative absence of permanent poverty implies that the “us” ranks are pretty fluid. In extreme cases, people at the very bottom of the income distribution even move to the very top. Horatio Alger stories are more common than most people recognize. Oprah Winfrey — one of Obama’s most visible and ardent supporters — herself rose from the bottom to the very top of the food chain. Bill and Hillary Clinton made a similar move. Obama himself didn’t start so low nor rise so far up the income ladder, but he clearly joined the ranks of “them” when he started collecting million-dollar book royalties. When these self-appointed champions of “us” play the class card, they must be biting their tongue.

Turnover at the top. Oprah’s ascension from poverty to the pinnacle of wealth reveals that even positions in the ranks of the rich aren’t permanent. Every year Forbes magazine compiles a list of the richest 400 Americans. The “Forbes 400” always arouses a lot of envy, energizing class warfare strategists. You needed at least $1.3 billion in assets to join the Forbes400 club this year. With the median U.S. household having net assets of less than $200,000, the Forbes list underscores the gap between “us” and “them.”

But there’s another dimension to the Forbes400 that gets little attention — the turnover in its ranks. Among the top 100 people on this year’s Forbes list, fewer than 50 were on that list at all eight years ago. As in other years, there was a rash of newcomers who had made their fortunes in technology, investments, and entertainment. Some, like Oprah, had roots in poverty; most emerged from the “struggling” middle class that Hillary and Obama bemoan. They switched sides in the projected class warfare.

Mobility in the middle. The most newsworthy team-switching occurs at the very top and bottom of the income distributions. But there is a lot of income mobility in the middle of the distribution as well. The Social Security Administration tracks people’s wages throughout their working life so as to compute an individual’s retirement benefits. Those earnings histories allow one to ascertain where a person resides on the income ladder in any given year and to observe how often people change relative rankings over time. Successful deployment of the class card depends on people staying on the same income rungs over time, thus maintaining a clear delineation between “us” and “them.”

In reality, people don’t stay on the same rungs very long. A great deal of upward mobility accrues to experience. Like the minimum-wage entrants, the typical worker’s productivity tends to increase with experience. As a result, wages tend to increase with age. This age-experience momentum is what transforms a lot of “us” into “them.”

All incomes don’t increase at the same pace, of course. Within any given age group there is another mobility phenomenon. Some people rocket up the income ladder; others take a tumble. Cyclical forces, technological breakthroughs, diverse investments, and pure luck all contribute to this intra-cohort income volatility. Think of successive high school reunions. At graduation, some seniors are picked as “most likely to succeed.” One of the reasons we go to the reunion is to discover who really fared well — and who didn’t. If you go every decade you’ll be surprised how the line-up changes. The quiet nerd who everyone tagged as a loser just sold his hi-tech start-up for millions of dollars. The math wiz is on probation for computer fraud, and that wannabe real-estate tycoon is now working at Wal-Mart. Such dramatic reversals of fortune are witnessed at virtually every reunion. The recent turmoil in financial markets is sure to produce even more reversals of fortune at the next one.

Social Security earnings histories document these intra-cohort changes in income position. Over a 15-year period, 70 percent of the workforce changes relative income position. The average move is 20 percent up or down the earnings hierarchy. Less than half of the workers who are at the top of the wage heap in one year are still at the top 15 years later. The same pattern is evident on the lowest rungs of the ladder: Only 35 percent of the workers who were at the bottom 15 years ago are still in the lowest position now. This kind of musical-chairs mobility is what makes school reunions so much fun. This same intra-cohort mobility further blurs the distinction between “us” and “them.”

Mobility expectations. The phenomenon of income mobility is so pervasive that it is near impossible to rally an army of “us” to do battle with “them.” The task is made even more difficult by even loftier expectations of switching sides. Public opinion polls reveal that a lot of average citizens expect to get rich. According to recent polls, one out of three American adults expects to be rich some day. If the “us” people expect to be among “them” in the future, they are certainly not going to rally to the side of “soak the rich” proponents today. Why raise income or estate taxes that might come back to bite you after you finally make it? This pervasive belief in the American Dream — the notion that everyone has a shot at the brass ring — is the most formidable constraint on the effectiveness of the class-warfare card.

The middle-class “squeeze”? The back-up strategy for playing the class card is to bemoan the economic stagnation in the ranks of “us.” Even if one concedes considerable fluidity across class boundaries, one can still excoriate the forces that depress the well-being for those residing (even temporarily) in the “us” ranks. You can’t win elections without the mainstream, middle-class vote. So promising a chicken in every pot is always an effective strategy. If you can convince voters that the pot will otherwise remain empty, this strategy takes on a sense of electoral urgency. That is why Obama and Clinton regularly depicted the middle class as “struggling.” As they tell the story, middle-class working families (the largest voting bloc) have actually seen their incomes decline in the past eight years. Hillary repeatedly referred to “seven years of stagnant wages, declining incomes and increasing inequality.” Obama echoed this theme by repeatedly bemoaning the “middle-class squeeze.” Voting for Obama, they contend, is the only way to raise working wages, increase health benefits, reduce tuition costs, and maintain home ownership — i.e., reverse the Bush-led economic decline of the working class (“us”).

The current slowdown in the U.S. economy and the crisis in the finance sector has made audiences more receptive to the “struggling middle class” thesis. As gdp growth has slowed, so has wage and income growth. But the economy has not yet receded into recession: Household incomes and wages continued to creep upwards even in this economic slowdown. Over the longer term of the last eight years or so, the economic status of the middle class has risen significantly.

Distorted Census pictures

Obama and clinton scoff at the notion that the middle class has experienced economic gains during the Bush years. In rebutting that claim, they point to the government’s own statistics. Hillary’s favorite statistic is the median household income. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the median household had an income of $50,233 in 2007 (the most recent year available), only a few hundred inflation-adjusted dollars more than it had in 1998

Household splintering. The statistical foundation for the “stagnation” thesis is not as definitive as Obama and Hillary would have us believe. The Census data originate from an annual survey of households. The data do not track individual households from year to year, but instead just take a snapshot of the households in existence in March of each year. From these annual snapshots, we try to infer what is happening to the typical household over time.

Back in 1970, 71 percent of all U.S. households were two-parent families. Now the ratio is only 51 percent.
The “typical” household, however, keeps changing. Since 1970, there has been a dramatic rise in divorced, never-married, and single-person households. Back in 1970, the married Ozzie and Harriet family was the norm: 71 percent of all U.S. households were two-parent families. Now the ratio is only 51 percent. In the process of this social revolution, the average household size has shrunk to 2.57 persons from 3.14 — a drop of 18 percent. The meaning? Even a “stagnant” average household income implies a higher standard of living for the average household member.

A closer look at household trends reveals that the percentage of one-person households has jumped to 27 percent from 17 percent. That’s right: more than one out of four U.S. households now has only one occupant. Who are these people? Overwhelmingly, they are Generation Xers whose good jobs and high pay have permitted them to move out of their parental homes and establish their own residences. As any parent knows, this transition can bring joy and relief to both parties. But it depresses statistics on average household income. Suppose a 20-year old child leaves the home of a $60,000 family. She moves into her own apartment and takes a $20,000 a year job at Starbucks. Presumably, everyone in this picture is better off, both economically and psychologically. But the Census data won’t reflect those gains. Instead, they will show that the average

The same kind of statistical distortion occurs when Baby Boomers retire. Early retirement is made possible by rising wages, benefits, and asset values: it is a byproduct of rising affluence. Earlier generations couldn’t afford to retire early. In fact, they often worked until they died, “dying with their boots on.” Statistically, working until you expire buoys statistics of median household incomes; retiring early depresses them.

To the extent that retiring seniors flee their extended families and establish their own residencies, the Census statistics on median incomes decline still further, and for the same reasons. All these transitions are evidence of rising affluence, not increasing hardship. Yet this splintering of the extended family exerts strong downward statistical pressure on the average income of U.S. households. Had the Generation Xers and their affluent grandparents all stayed under the same roof, the average household income would be higher, but most of us would be worse off.

Those immigrants again. Another depressant on household income statistics (but not actual incomes) is that continuing influx of immigrants. As noted earlier, these immigrants overwhelmingly enter at the lowest rungs of the income ladder. Although there is an ongoing and intense debate about whether these immigrants take jobs away from American workers, the statistical impact is unambiguous: measured median and average household incomes decline as immigrants enter the country. The same kind of thing happens when Clinton or Obama enters a working-class tavern: The average income of bar patrons goes up even though no one’s income actually increases. Now imagine what happens to the average income of the bar patrons when an immigrant farm worker walks in. With over 1 million immigrants coming in to the economy each year, this statistical distortion is significant.

Rising standards of living

All these statistical complications imply that Obama’s “middle-class squeeze” is substantially exaggerated. The typical American household has in fact experienced a rising standard of living over the past eight years, the current macro slowdown notwithstanding. The total output of the economy — the economic “pie” from which we all draw slices — has grown by over $4 trillion per year since 2000. The Obama/Clinton stagnation thesis implies that the rich got all this added output. “They” got ever-larger slices of the pie while the rest of “us” got smaller portions every year. Were that true, “they” would be phenomenally rich. If all the added output had gone to the top 10 percent of U.S. households, then their incomes would have increased by a whopping $350,000 per household. Yet, the Census Bureau tells us their average income (including recent increases) is closer to $200,000. So “they” didn’t confiscate all the economics gains of the last eight years. A good many of “us” got larger slices of the pie as well.

That broad swath of economic advancement shows up in personal consumption. According to the Labor Department, personal consumption spending has risen by $2.5 trillion since 2000. More Americans own homes and new cars today than ever before, despite slowdowns and financial crises in both industries. Laptop computers, iPhones, and flat-panel tvs are fast becoming necessities rather than luxury items.

Self-assessed gains. The average American isn’t oblivious to these economic gains. In the 1980 election, Ronald Reagan asked voters to decide whether they were better off at the end of the Carter administration than they had been at its beginning. Bill Clinton used that same pocketbook ploy to win the 1992 election. In both instances, a late-term recession turned the answers negative.

Polls now register increasing anxiety about both the future of the economy and personal finances. But even in the midst of this economic insecurity, most voters realize they are better off today than in earlier years. According to the most recent Pew Research surveys, two-thirds of all adults recognize that they are better off than their parents were. A plurality also claims they are better off now than five years ago, despite the current slowdown. A majority of Americans told Gallup they expect to be better off financially next year.

Trumping the class card

The economy iscertainly not a strong suit for Republicans this year. As Professor Ray Fair of Yale University has documented, voters do vote their pocketbooks. Or, as Bill Clinton’s campaign more famously proclaimed in 1992: “it’s the economy, stupid!” According to Professor Fair’s more detailed calculations, only a “Good News” quarter of per capita gdp growth above 3.2 percent can salvage a Republican victory this year. But, clearly, the Democrats are not willing to place all their bets on the (weak) performance of the macro economy. They are hedging their bets by playing the class card — making the election look like an epic struggle between “us” (the vast middle class and poor) vs. “them” (the rich). It is a hedge that so strains credulity that it might just end up costing them the game.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bradley R. Schiller is a professor of economics at the University of Nevada-Reno and American University. He is the author of The Economy Today (McGraw-Hill, 2008) and The Economics of Poverty and Discrimination (Prentice-Hall, 2008).

____________________

marctx:

Joetheplumber:
Boom said...
"With all due respect, you are an idiot."

He does it to me too. No wonder McCain is dropping, Boom even attacks people that favor McCain.

____________________

Hey look, a South Dakota poll! Click my user name for the link.

KELO-TV/Argus Leader (no trend lines)
McCain 48
Obama 41

Obama's winning Independents 47/41.

____________________

liz from NJ:

boom,

I hope your party nominate Palin as a presidential candidate next 10 election cycles. It gaurantees democratical rule from here to eternity.

did you see the latest polls? Woman disapprove Palin by 2 to 1. Her favorability rating is net negative. Many independents are driven against the McCain ticket because of her. Her pick was cited by the independent voters as a single most glaring example of McCain's lack of judgement.

Go ahead.

____________________

RussTC3:

Sorry, Independents are actually +10 Obama, not +7 (47/37).

____________________

Basil:

Moonbats for Obama!

I think you've got a marketing idea there, Mr. B. Thanks for the tip.

____________________

mrzookie:

@boom

"Besides, Bristol, Willow and Piper could be anything. What's the point of naming your kids after inanimate objects if you can't bring them along as carry on?"

Hate your politics, but LOVE your lines. You are absolutely on your game tonite! You'd give Leno a run for his money :)

____________________

RussTC3:

I can't do math. Independents are +10 Obama, not +6 as I wrote above.

____________________

boomshack:

muckinello:

I wellcome a Palin/Romney/Huckabee ticket.

I am sure you will be the very first person they consult, mr. wellcome [sic]. There is no need to drag Huckabee into this, I did not bring him up. He is too old to run in 2012 besides. Did you know that Huckabee in Spanish is Huckabeja?

Ron Paul would have much more cross-party appeal, or someone like Michael Bloomberg. But the rethugs are to dumb and too tied with the religious zealots to grab that chance.

Yeah, you might as well draft the cross-dresser whatever for your own ticket. Ron Paul is a Librian, and as such is not wellcome [get it?] in the Republican Party. And you can run your own Lieberman/Bloomberg ticket up your own flagpole and stick Huckabee on top!

____________________

boomshack:

cbeckham:

The Futility of Class Warfare

Long post with too many words! Not gonna read it. FAIL!

____________________

political_junki:

@BOOM:
Do you remember you were excpecting votes to tighten after VP Debate?
You used to think since she has managed to finish 3 sentences she had memorized, correctly people are going to move to McCain en-masse!
Every now and then read your last posts, you will be surprised how good they stand the test of time ;-)
They will also help you re-evaluate your poliitical knowledge!

____________________

boomshack:

marctx:

Joetheplumber:
Boom said...
"With all due respect, you are an idiot."

He does it to me too. No wonder McCain is dropping, Boom even attacks people that favor McCain

First of all, I never called you an idiot. I called you a traitor, which you know in your heart you are. And now you are an idiot too.

____________________

boomshack:

liz from NJ:

boom,
I hope your party nominate Palin as a presidential candidate next 10 election cycles. It gaurantees democratical rule from here to eternity.

did you see the latest polls? Woman disapprove Palin by 2 to 1. Her favorability rating is net negative. Many independents are driven against the McCain ticket because of her. Her pick was cited by the independent voters as a single most glaring example of McCain's lack of judgement.

Liz, do you mind if I call you Liz?
First of all, I know you are an IT professional and all, but it's "Women disapprove", not "woman disapprove". And secondly, it's just that they might need a few years to warm up to Palin. In four years Palin's look will fade even more, and women won't be as jealous of her good looks, and in the meanwhile, Sarah Palin will be able to catch up on some reading, get more glib and smarter and chisel out a better message for the mainstream.

____________________

marctx:

boomshack:

Its like the primary season all over again! I was fighting for my candidate Hillary Clinton against the Obama trolls in the democratic party. Now I'm insulted by you jackass when I joined the republican party. Please. Get a life troll.

____________________

Viperlord:

Peoples.... You've seen all of boom's old primary predictions, all of which went down in flames, and attacking anyone who disagreed with him in the last 2 polling topics right? Or should I put them in here for everyone's benefit?

____________________

political_junki:

To liz from NJ:
from BOOM:
"and women won't be as jealous of her good looks"
Boom's brain, hard at work.

You see at what level his brain works?

____________________

boomshack:

mrzookie:

@boom

"Besides, Bristol, Willow and Piper could be anything. What's the point of naming your kids after inanimate objects if you can't bring them along as carry on?"

Hate your politics, but LOVE your lines. You are absolutely on your game tonite! You'd give Leno a run for his money :)

Thank you! You and the poster Basil seem like very civil and polite young men. I noticed your general decorum in the forum long ago, but didn't have a chance to compliment you.

Basil, are you named after Basil Fawlty, the famous British comedian and inn owner?

____________________

falcon79:

@boomshack:
jeez man learn to take a compliment
your candidate sucks ass, btw

____________________

boquita:

Is this true, that the internals look bad?

mahlers5th:

Internals in PA are not looking good (for Obama) and Rendell wants him to come back. If McCain wins PA, Obama can win VA and still lose. Closer than it looks.

Somehow it reminds me when McCain left IA to concentrate on WI or MN and that did not seem to work so far.

____________________

deeznutsrepubs:

HEY REPUB TROLLS-

TICK TOCK

TICK TOCK

TICK TOCK

TICK TOCK

____________________

boomshack:

political_junki:

To liz from NJ:
from BOOM:
"and women won't be as jealous of her good looks"
Boom's brain, hard at work.

You see at what level his brain works?

You, of all people, claiming to be a political junkie, ought to know that politics is essentially primal and has to connect on a gut level. If you are denying that, you are fooling yourself. And I am sorry. Becuase you seem like such a promising young man.

____________________

chesirecat47:

Drudge reporting that Zogby has Obama opening up a ten point lead once the tracker comes out.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

lol, boom has been predicting a tied race for 2 months now. No one in this entire forum has been as consistently wrong about everything.

Remember boomshaks "surge"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "tied race by Sunday?" fail.
Remember boomshaks "suspending McCains campaign is brilliant"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain will look like he saved the economy by going back to Washington"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "attack Obama on Ayers is the way to go"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain will destroy Obama in the debates"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the first debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the second debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the third debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "Palin is an awesome pick"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "I have the gold question that will destroy Obama" which had already been answered? fail.

Pathetic. Epic Fail.

____________________

alanskeyisawesome:

nighty night you commy lib muff-munchers

McCain Palin 08
Whatever It Takes!

____________________

boomshack:

marctx:

boomshack:

Its like the primary season all over again! I was fighting for my candidate Hillary Clinton against the Obama trolls in the democratic party. Now I'm insulted by you jackass when I joined the republican party. Please. Get a life troll.

Who cares about where you cross or how many times? The point was, I did not call you an idiot and you said I did. You owe me an apology, which I might in my infinite generocity accept.

____________________

BlueInTexas:

The problem with politics today is that it IS operating at a gut level. One would think that after two centuries we'd at least have moved at step beyond that.

Personally 'traitor' is an extremely harsh charge and unless you have actual proof of it - completely unnecessary.

____________________

NW Patrick:

Wow what a ****TY day for Boom****!

____________________

political_junki:

@BOOM:
Palin is ignorant.
She believes earth was created 6000 years ago.
She thinks Adam and EVE were living with Dainasours at the same time
She doesnt believe in evolution.
She cant name a Supreme court case


DO you honestly think educated women in US dont vote for her because she is good looking?
You just offend a majority of women in US and their intelligence.

____________________

Pat:

@boomshak,

"Liz, do you mind if I call you Liz?
First of all, I know you are an IT professional and all, but it's "Women disapprove", not "woman disapprove". And secondly, it's just that they might need a few years to warm up to Palin. In four years Palin's look will fade even more, and women won't be as jealous of her good looks, and in the meanwhile, Sarah Palin will be able to catch up on some reading, get more glib and smarter and chisel out a better message for the mainstream"

It does not matter if she is older and uglier in 4 years. By nature, she is a brainless Barbie. And women don't like that type. She will never appeal to women.

____________________

boomshack:

falcon79:

@boomshack:
jeez man learn to take a compliment
your candidate sucks ass, btw

If that's a compliment, I must be missing something. You seem a little angry. And why? Because I drew a parallel between your chosen screen name and my post which you like?

I could have been nasty, dissecting your name into "fal" and "con", neither one of which is positive for you. But I chose the civil route, which you did not.

____________________

Viperlord:

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. =)"

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Remember boomshaks "surge"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "tied race by Sunday?" fail.
Remember boomshaks "suspending McCains campaign is brilliant"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain will look like he saved the economy by going back to Washington"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "attack Obama on Ayers is the way to go"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain will destroy Obama in the debates"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the first debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the second debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the third debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "Palin is an awesome pick"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "I have the gold question that will destroy Obama" which had already been answered? fail.

Pathetic. Epic Fail.

How can 1 person be wrong about EVERYTHING?

____________________

political_junki:

@BOOM:
Palin is ignorant.
She believes earth was created 6000 years ago.
She thinks Adam and EVE were living with Dainasours at the same time
She doesnt believe in evolution.
She cant name a Supreme court case


DO you honestly think educated women in US dont vote for her because she is good looking?
You just offend a majority of women in US and their intelligence.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

I mean, by dumb luck, even the stupidest person on the planet would get 1 prediction right by now.

____________________

Viperlord:

Here's one of boom's primary predictions:

"HERE’S WHAT THE PUNDITS DON’T REALIZE: ROMNEY ALREADY HAS THIS THING LOCKED UP.

A recent poll by Gallup indicated that only a third of registered Republicans EVEN KNOW THAT ROMNEY WON THE IOWA STRAW POLL!

Now folks, this was ALL over the news for a week and 2/3rds of Republicans don’t even friggin know it happened?

Wow, I would call that, “unengaged”, wouldn’t you? This then explains why Romney is running away with early states such as Iowa, NH and Nevada. They are engaged. They are paying attention. They know who Romney is and they like him.

I mean hell, if 2/3rds of Republicans nationally don’t even know he won the Iowa Straw Poll, that goes 90% of the way there to explain why his national numbers are so low (mid-teens).

So what happens when he sweeps Iowa, NH and Nevada? Then all those clueless Republicans in other states say, “wow, who is this guy, he seems pretty sharp…”

I’m tellin you, this is all over but the braggin."

____________________

jonny87:

@chesirecat47

nice spot

____________________

kerrchdavis:

roflmao!!! moron!

____________________

marctx:

boomshack:

Do you read english?? I said you called McCain supporter Joetheplumber and idiot and me a traitor.

You need to get your McCain payroll check garnished for pushing votes away. It's clear who the idiot is here.

____________________

Viperlord:

Some more primary commentary from dear boomspin: "Romney will win in 2008. McCain, the poster
boy for RINO’s will NEVER win the Republican
Nomination. It is just impossible.

I have no idea why McCain polls so highly
amongst Republicans other than name
recognition. In my cirle of Republican friends
(it is very large), most consider him a
Democrat and despise him."

____________________

kerrchdavis:

boom, how come you are WRONG about everything?

____________________

boomshack:

political_junki:

@BOOM:
Palin is ignorant.
She believes earth was created 6000 years ago.
She thinks Adam and EVE were living with Dainasours at the same time
She doesnt believe in evolution.
She cant name a Supreme court case

she could be lulling all of us into complacency because she does not want to be on the bottom side of the ticket. Did you see how lately she strikes against McCain on his policies? That is Palin affirming and asserting herself for 2012. At this point she really does not care how the current ticket does: just look at her interviews, stump speeches and so on.

She is trying to outmaneuver Hillary who was trying to lose the election for Obama so that she could run in 2012. It is well documented about how Palin has learned from Geraldine Ferraro and Hillary Clinton, and now she is applying the same moves as Hillary to INTENTIONALLY lose the 2008 elections. It's called chess. It's all about strategy.

If Obama fixes the economy, she slides in in 2012 and gets a better country than it is now. If Obama fails to fix the economy, USA will still be better off under him than under the current socialist administration. So you see? It's inevitable: a Palin win/win.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

lol, what a joke!

good find Viperlord. Boomshak was stupid months upon months ago..it wasn't a recent development.

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Boomshack you are a scam. Not one of your predictions has come true. I was on the fence then decided to be a Republican after reading your posts believing what you told me.

Then I watched the television and realized the entire nation was making fun of John McCain for picking such a ****ing IDIOT for a VP. It showed America that he really didn't put "Country 1st."

I am now going to vote for Obama. Thank God I didn't send in that ballot already!

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Did anyone hear the latest? As Boom would say ITS ALL OVER THE NEWS - McCain's ****ED!

PALIN SAYS THE VP IS THE "LEADER OF THE SENATE!"

I didn't know that! They lied to me in school!

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@alankeys

roflmao!

____________________

Viperlord:

At least one of the finds was (Insert name I can't remember but think it began with M), and he found the site where boom was spewing this too. And here's another:

"#

Patrick,

Are you now on Huckabee’s payroll? Whatever happened to McCain? Guess he’s not your boy anymore since he’s not signing your checks?

Dude, you are the consummate CONTRARIAN INDICATOR. Whatever you are in favor of always eventually fails. It’s remarkable.

I had a stock trading friend like that once. It was uncanny how he was ALWAYS WRONG. My other friends and I actually made a lot of money by just doing the opposite of whatever he recommended.

I’ll try to be gentle on this. Mike Huckabee is a nice guy and well-meaning, but he has NO CHANCE to win the Republican Nomination. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Snowballs in hell.

He also has no chance to become the VP Nominee after slamming Romney.

Of course the MSM loves Huckabee BECAUSE he has no chance. Their former favorite loser, McCain, is out of the race so now they are getting on the Huckabee Train.

They want to do everything they can to make sure the weakest possible candidate faces Hillary in the General Election. This is why they pound on Romney 24/7 and throw roses at Huckabee.

I have a good rule of thumb for you as a Conservative. Here it is:

“DON’T TRUST ANYTHING THE MSM LIKES”

It’s funny how Romney’s 32% in Iowa 9and winning every single other straw poll held) is “meaningless”. Yet Huckabee gets 18% in Iowa and boy-oh-biy, here he comes!

Dude, for a guy that gets paid to be smart, you aren’t very smart."

____________________

BlueInTexas:

Boomshack is a living metaphor for the current McCain/Palin campaign - winning elections by isolation and intimidation.

We've had that the last couple of elections - time for a change.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

Can someone please tell me how one person can be wrong about EVERYTHING?

____________________

reverendmatt:

All of this wonderful, but the basic message is to start to celebrate the minute McCain concedes, hopefully about 8:02 pm on Nov 4, keep working, keep an eye on attempts to disqualify legitimate voters,and document them. Although there is stilltime for sime kind of halloween surprise the repubs best bet now is some kind of widespread fraud, document everything.

____________________

alankeysisawesome:





Boom why don't we just admit IT'S OVER.

There is nothing that 2 weeks can erase.

McCain's an old ****!

____________________

boomshack:

OK, posters Viperlord and kerrchdavis,
I will grant you that I was a little overly exhuberant with Mitt Romney. But can you blame me for that? You are just as enthusiastic for your candidate.

____________________

BlueInTexas:

@kerr

Well Bush did it for 8 years...

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Statistical tie by yesterday! Signed - Boomshack

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@boomshak

Remember boomshaks "surge"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "tied race by Sunday?" fail.
Remember boomshaks "suspending McCains campaign is brilliant"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain will look like he saved the economy by going back to Washington"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "attack Obama on Ayers is the way to go"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain will destroy Obama in the debates"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the first debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the second debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "McCain won the third debate"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "Palin is an awesome pick"? fail.
Remember boomshaks "I have the gold question that will destroy Obama" which had already been answered? fail.

Pathetic. Epic Fail.

Being exuberant is 1 thing. Shooting turds out of your mouth, cherry picking polls, defying logic and being swine personified is not "exuberance."

You have no credibility anymore boomshak. Everything you say is completely, 100% wrong.

____________________

political_junki:

@boom:
"She is trying to outmaneuver Hillary who was trying to lose the election for Obama so that she could run in 2012."

You have a good u=imagination, I give you that. Beyond that all your analysis was just nonsense. As I said earlier, I really encourage you to read some of your pasts predictions and analysis and see what % of them turned out to be true. That will help you re-evaluate your political thinking !

____________________

BlueInTexas:

@boom

Plus, with Palin already changing her positions on McCain's points it seems she's already thrown McCain under her 2012 Bus.

____________________

falcon79:

@boom:
oic
well good one anyways
catch ya tomorrow bro

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Boomshack your credibility is next to ZERO.

____________________

boomshack:

marctx:

boomshack:

Do you read english?? I said you called McCain supporter Joetheplumber and idiot and me a traitor.

I called JoeThePlumber an idiot because his postings are idiotic just like the real JoeThePlumber is
1)not really Joe
2)does not have a plumbers' license
3)does not make anywhere near enough money to be concerned about paying taxes on $250,000/yr income
4)owes back taxes
and as such is
5)an embarrassment for all the Republicans out there.

Talk about chosing an idiotic moniker!

And you, sir, were called a traitor that you in your yellow bellied heart know you are!

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

OMG people Palin will disappear into history. Do you think the GOP will come back in '012 with P A L I N? You are on crack!

____________________

boomshak:

MORE TROUBLE BREWIN IN PA FOR OBAMARX:

Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell has sent two separate memos to the Obama campaign in the past five days requesting that the Democratic Presidential candidate—as well as Hillary and Bill Clinton—return to campaign in Pennsylvania, Rendell told CNN's Gloria Borger.

Rendell said the McCain campaign is clearly making a push to win Pennsylvania, given the recent visits by the Arizona senator, his wife and his running mate. As a result, he wants Obama to appear in western Pennsylvania, Harrisburg and one more “large rally” in Philadelphia. Democrats generally worry that the race is significantly closer than what recent polls have suggested. According to Rendell, there is also worry among Democrats the McCain campaign has successfully raised the enthusiasm level among Republicans in the state.

Add this to all the positive movement for McCain in the new Zogby Battleground polls and it makes these huge leads in the national polls look like bullsh*t.

____________________

kerrchdavis:

@marctx

if boomshak is calling you a traitor, that pretty much means you're anything BUT a traitor.

100% wrong 100% of the time

____________________

Schill:

Zogby poll tomorrow Obama will be up 10 points

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Boom movement in ZOGBY, a HORRIBLE pollster. Ooh!:) I'm sure the DEMS are scared.

____________________

boomshak:

JUST TO CLARIFY:

boomshack IS not BOOMSHAK.

I am the original boomshak, this other dude is an imposter trying to stir up trouble.

____________________

political_junki:

boomshak:
"Add this to all the positive movement for McCain in the new Zogby Battleground polls "

Keep that thought buddy! I am out of here.
G'night every one :)

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

BlueInTexas:

@boom

Plus, with Palin already changing her positions on McCain's points it seems she's already thrown McCain under her 2012 Bus.

Hello?! Did you even READ what I posted at 10:28?

____________________

reverendmatt:

Thanks boomshak

Its good to see someone who doesn't jump overboard when the ship is sinking. When you are relying on Zogby for your argument you are desperate.

No doubt there will be some tightening nationally as we come to the finish line but its going to take a big difference maker to change the picture.

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

HOLY **** BOOMSHACK IS QUOTING INTERNET POLLS TO SHOW MOVEMENT TO MCCAIN IN BG STATES! LOL
WOW.

____________________

boomshack:

I really don't know what the imposter is trying to prove here!

____________________

boomshak:

Based upon Zogby's battleground polling, an 8 point lead nationally makes NO SENSE. McCain is within the MOE on every poll, how can he also be down 8 nationally?

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

Double digits baby! Keep them polls, and the surge coming.

LANDSLIDE BABY LANDSLIDE!

____________________

Viperlord:

Missed that at first. So the real boom STILL hasn't acknowledged how hideously wrong he was about Romney. And everything.

____________________

boomshak:

boomshack = IMPOSTER

____________________

Viperlord:

These parodies of parodies are just hilarious.

____________________

boomshack:

None of the polls are adding up to an integer.
There is something very screwy going on here.

____________________

hou04:

Boomshak,

maybe you should read this... it has much more truth to it than your Zogby Internet Polls you are suddenly clinging to.

A piece by Charlie Cook...

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/ot_20081021_3912.php

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

INTERNET POLLs from Zogby are a JOKE! LOL
Wow talk about desperation. Cmon' boom****!

____________________

sunnymi:


McCain up only 7 is South Dakota!

KELO/Argus Leader. 10/13-15. Likely voters. MoE 3.5% (No trend lines)

McCain (R) 48
Obama (D) 41

____________________

boomshak:

@kerrchdavis:

Dumbass, "Boomshack" ain't Boomshak.

____________________

boomshack:

Viperlord:

Missed that at first. So the real boom STILL hasn't acknowledged how hideously wrong he was about Romney. And everything.


@Viperlord
As real boomshack, let me be the first one to apologize for all of the hideous wrong predictions. And everything. It is all my fault. I am going back to teaching about wheelchair repair. But I stand by my early polling results explanations.

____________________

AdamSC:

@Boomshak about cherry picking polls

I remember awhile ago you said yourself that Rasmussen polls aren't worthy of time discussing over. You said the same about Gallup.

But when either of them shows a lead or gain for your candidate, you hop right on the bandwagon.

Quote from you also, "Rasmussen usually lags about five days to a week on what is actually happening on the ground".

Well your right, Rasmussen is lagging behind and is trying to play it close so they can be the more 'credible' poll when it all comes down to who wins.

And that GWU poll has way too small of a sample and it probably overweight republicans as well. Only having Obama up to one at this point of the race is ridiculous.

Take a look at the Pew and NBC/WSJ polls. John McCain's voters are voting against Obama. Obama's voters are voting because they believe in his sell, his policies and campaign message. Who's going to show up in early voting and on election day? Overzealous Obama supporters or John McCain's non-energized supporters?

This negativity lately with calling democrats anti-americans, communists, socialists is going to bury him even deeper.

The even bigger point is the national polls at this point will begin to get more narrow but Obama's EV lead so far is too overwhelming for McCain to handle. So really, national polls show a traction for him but they will soon fade into existence and become non-eligible.

Blow out or non, Obama will win simply put because he's got the better organization and way more money than John McCain and the Republican party put together. So he was pretty smart to opt out of Public financing because him and his staff had the oversight to predict that John McCain would use independent organizations to run against Obama.

All Obama has to do up to this point is keep talking about the economy, holding big rallies in key battleground states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida. Early voting already has Obama up in critical counties across the country.

Obama has been counting heavily on his young voter base turnout but now he's starting to take away from McCain the voters that he was counting on to have any hope of winning this election. The Old grannies that he thought he could pull away from the democrats because of Hillary Clinton's lose solely by picking a woman governor has done him no credit, and they now are backing Obama because they are afraid to lose their social security and retirement funds.

Also the Vice Presidential pick for McCain has an even more discernment with his continuing slip in the polls. John McCain has now got to shake off his association with Sarah Palin who voters are more concerned about than George Bush. You have to be pretty lame to be more unfavorable than the lame duck President himself.

Celebrity, socialist, anti-american, communist. Whatever, it's old time republican broiler plate that we've lived with for the longest time. These are the old guard who fear that their claw is on the lever of power is being pried off.

It's not going to work this time. The Republicans best strategies have failed and they're starting to pull stuff out of Joe the Plumber's "crack".

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Zogby internet is the pollster that showed Obama only up 5 in Illinois and LOSING NEW YORK A MONTH OR TWO BACK! ROFL God this is fun.

____________________

boomshack:

boomshak:
@kerrchdavis:

Dumbass, "Boomshack" ain't Boomshak.

FAIL! I would never insult an intelligent poster! This man is an imposter! Somebody please call the police! Shack is spelled with a "ck". The dictionary is ON MY SIDE!

____________________

Viperlord:

I'm LMAO off right now. Hilarious. Keep up the good work folks!

____________________

hou04:

RCP is not even including Zogby's internet polls in the averages, and RCP has been pretty right-leaning this season.

A few days ago, I read on the John Zogby's Wikipedia entry how he on October 14 this year in his interactive polls included questions such as "would you still support Barack Obama if he supported drivers licenses for illegal immigrants?". Links to screen shots of these questions were included on Wikipedia, too.

Checked again this evening, and the whole thing is gone.

____________________

boomshack:

AdamSC:

Long post with too many words. Won't read. FAIL!

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

http://www.bradblog.com/?cat=166

DO NOT LET THEM STEAL YOUR VOTE! Do NOT let them turn you away. And all my old peeps down in FL, PLEASE make sure you aren't voting for Barr or Nader when you think you are voting for Obama. Check it before they wreck it!

Oh, and for the record. I am the real BOOMFAIL.

:)

____________________

alankeysisawesome:

Boomshak I think you are such a joke people have made names close to yours, just like MINE! :)

____________________

boomshak:

I'm still trying to figure out how Zogby can have McCain within the MOE on every one of his battleground polls but down 10 nationally.

Anyway, I'm stickin with Rasmussen.

Oh, BTW, you guys do know that Zogby is a huge Democrat, right?

____________________

boomshack:

alankeysisawesome:

Zogby internet is the pollster that showed Obama only up 5 in Illinois and blah blah blah...

There are TWO types of Internet! There is the dial up kind and the fast one. And Zogby had been using the slow dial up kind that obviously favors the slower Republican voters. Meanwhile, he just as obviously caught his mistake during the primaries and SWITCHED TO THE FASTER INTERNET!!!

So, get a grip, alankeys!

____________________

BOOMFAIL:

Which poll is looking like the outlier today??

____________________

hou04:

@boomshak:

"Anyway, I'm stickin with Rasmussen."

Ok, boom... when Rasmussen has Obama more than 4 pts again, will you still stick with him? Or maybe ask him to start doing some interactive polls?

____________________

boomshack:

And btw, I am still trying to figure out how the polls work, especially that Zogby moonbat, who is obviously a loon. You do realize that Rasmussen is the one true pollster, right?

All you have to do is to spell his name backwards: Nes SUM Sar. I am not sure what Nes is, but SUM makes a LOT of sense. And Sar is obviously short for Sarah Palin, the new face of the New Republican Party.

____________________

reverendmatt:

Again, I don't feel comfortable with this self-congratulatory victory dance, look at the repubs line these days, the anti-acorn stuff, ( about .5% fraud while bringing hundreds of thousands of voters into the picture) and this "real" america stuff. This is coded racist stuff, essentially floating the idea of disqualifying as much of the AA vote as possible. Instead of saying rude things to repub trolls lets keep our eyes on the prize.

____________________

mandalorianarmy:

Check out Drudge, Obama up by 10 points in the coming Zogby poll!

____________________

Bigmike:

Well I feel like hell.

I don't have an imposter.

____________________

maddiekat:

Zogby Poll O by 10..I guess that Powell endorsement is starting to kick in.

____________________

mandalorianarmy:

It's the early voters being included in the likely models. They can't question the whether the new voters will vote after they have already voted!

____________________

Bigmike:

So how is it we know which way the early voters voted? Is it exit polls? According to the exit polls from 2004, Pres Kerry is almost thru his first term.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

@BigMike,
you are a reasonable person with opposing set of views on some issues. You argue and REASON out the issues unlike the trolls. Just my theory, but that is why you are not being parodied. And I do know something about parody. I think.

____________________

mandalorianarmy:

Some of the early voting trends are showing up in pollsters plus the polling sites keep demographics of the voters such as party affiliation.

Here is some of that info:

http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html

____________________

mandalorianarmy:

Some of the early voting trends are showing up in pollsters plus the voting sites keep demographics of the voters such as party affiliation.

Here is some of that info:

http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html

____________________

Bigmike:

I see absolutely no reason for the "almost" names. Boom, Alan, and the others have just as much right to their views, and to post here as long as they are reasonably civil.

I suppose the imposters think they are funny. What they are is cowards. You want to mock boom, stand up and be a man.

____________________

zotz:

If McCain uses Wright in the last two weeks after he said he wouldn't he will lose any remaining dignity that he has left. It would be a transparent attempt to pander to racism.
Remember all that stuff about radical black theology that FOX was spewing out during the primaries?

____________________

Bigmike:

Excuse me for getting sidetracked.

Polls.

I was hoping for continued narrowing in the national polls, and some movement in the state polls. I was out much of the evening and have not had a chance to look at the latest from the states. But there is nothing in the national polls that excites me.

Anyone know the odds of 60 Dem senators? Or as some of us view that, proof that the apocolypse is upon us.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

Well, BigMike, here too we respectfully disagree. Were alankeyes and boomshak et al a) civil and b) posters, they would not spawn parodies. But they are trolls and as such do not reason out their views and points, which, mind you, are laughable most of the time.

However, using your own logic, anyone who mocks them using what you call "impostor" names, also has a right to his/her views, right? I mean, they are NOT logging in under the EXACT name of the trolls; they are coming up with DIFFERENT names, and as such then are entitled to their opinions and the expression thereof, right?

And finally, it does not take a man to mock boom. Just about everyone on this site, with a handful of exceptions that only prove my point, have made fun of boom. There is no sport in mocking boom. It is like shooting fish in a barrel. But getting inside his mindset - ah! Now there is a sport! LOL.

____________________

Basil:

Boomshak IS Boomshack!

It's the oldest trick in the world. Establish two different identities, slowly switch from the old one to the new one, and finally abandon the old one and deny that it ever existed.

It worked for Nixon and it's working for Boomshak/Boomshack.

If necessary, Boomshach will appear later, and be a very reasonable, calm person.


____________________

Bigmike:

zotz

When you are surrounded by the enemy, outnumbered, and you only have a couple of bullets left, do you use them?

It is either use them or throw in the towel. Nobody wants to be labeled as a quitter. Expect to hear more about the good Rev Wright.

____________________

miatch:

BigMike,
Unfortunately Dems wont get to 60. And even were they to hit 60 on the mark, Lieberman will switch sides and cacus with the republicans. god, how I loathe that man.

____________________

Northeastern Republican:

the widening polls is kind of suprising, only due to the fact that as of about 24 or 48 hours ago all signs were that they were narrowing. if its because of powell's endorsement i don't think that will be enough to keep it that wide for 2 weeks. something else will either help it stay that wide or wider, or something will make it narrow. like anyother intervening event over the last 4 weeks (debates, joe the plumber, etc) anytime something happens the polls react and then a few days later they seem to resettle. what i am most curious about is how will the state polls react to the widening of the national polls? the pollster.com map is starting to look a lot yellower than ive seen it in a few weeks. if this keeps going election night could be a huge toss up.

____________________

Rollin08:

@Bigmike:

Yeah, I agree..


This was pretty funny. Just the way he looks when he says "I couldn't agree with them more"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLVSURlFoQs

"Yo Western Pa. Some people have been saying you're racist rednecks. I couldn't agree with them more or disagree with you more. Or disagree with myself more. You're the most patriotic god loving patriots that have ever disagreed with God.

I'm John McCain and I approved this message.
"

____________________

McShame:

That was pure comedy, Boomshack. I'll be the first to say I fell for it because it sounded so much like the real Boom - the lame predictions, drooling over Palin's looks, insulting others and calling them idiots, etc.

____________________

Bigmike:

MNLatteLiberal

Guess we will disagree. If I think someone is full of beans, I am gonna tell them so. And not under an assumed name. But I grew up before the internet. Hell, everything on here is anonymous and done with assumed names.

OK, point made.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

Mike, Nate has Senate races analyzed at
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/search/label/senate%20polls

hope this helps answer your question. My PC is acting up so I cannot check the odds right now specifically.

____________________

Boris_Dieter:

@bigmike

Yeah i think the prob of a 60 dems senate is set at around 30% or less, and so you can rest easy and wait a bit longer for the apocalypse.

____________________

carl29:

Have you seen the drudge?

Obama leading by 10% in Zogby...developing :-)

____________________

Bigmike:

Rollin08

I have no clue what you are talking about.

miatch

How can you loathe Lieberman? He was Gore's pick for VP. The most qualified person in the world to be a heartbeat away. And then the Dem party **** all over him. If Lieberman is the brake on the leftward lurch, I call that poetic justice. I am sure you feel much the same about Powell. Politics sure is funny, eh.

____________________

Basil:

Bigmike,

I checked out John Danforth (with whom I was acquainted somewhat), or at least the Wikipedia article. While his connection with Thomas is disturbing, I did appreciate his quote:

"By a series of recent initiatives, Republicans have transformed our party into the political arm of conservative Christians...".

As R's go, you picked a good one. I went to an Episcopal school so I sort of know where he's coming from.

Try the Wiki article on Wayne Morse, my personal fave.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

Mike,
not to belabor the point, but the first adage about Internet, is "On Internet no one knows you are a dog". We do NOT know who is doing what and for what reason.

Basil thinks that the faux boom is boom himself. And makes a valid argument for that. I, however, can point my finger at him and say, "you, sir are the fake boomshack" or the real one for that matter or both. And all your reasoning is a diversionary tactic. And would be just as right.

On my original point, if you say all opinions are allowed, then all opinions are allowed, including parodies. If trolling is not allowed, then the original trolls are not allowed. We need consistency, that is the essence of my argument.

And the only way to drive out a troll is to outtroll him/her. I've been around the net since before Al Gore invented it, and this is a lesson learned long ago. Because, as you have seen, trolls do not reason, do not debate, they just post insults. And that makes them fair game in my book. That is where we disagree.

@McShame,
I will respectfully disagree with your statement as well. The only ones the fake boom insulted, if you analyze carefully, were those trolls who repeatedly insulted others. All the meanwhile, with the "regulars" he kept a civil tone and bravely took the brunt of insults and attacks cast at him/her. But that is just one man's analysis, and a man who tends to overanalyze at that :)

____________________

Pat:

My head is spinning with all the alankeys and booms. It is no longer fun. I don't know who is who.

____________________

Boris_Dieter:

Ladies and Gentlemen, all the boom***s are also alanskeysisawesome or however else he spells it. Boom*** has a serious case of cyber-multiplied personality disorder.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

@Bigmike,
See? Boris_Dieter has his own view on this too. He rolls all the trolls into one singular poster.

Pat, imho, it only teaches us to be vigilant and careful in reading what others post. And I do think it's fun. It's an antidote for the message of hate of the original trolls. Again, imho.

____________________

Boris_Dieter:

@Bigmike

I agree with you on Lieberman. He's actually not despised much by his democratic colleagues, since he votes with them more often than McCain does with Bush. Lieberman is going to be treated with kid gloves by the dems, since they might need him to bust GOP filibusters.

____________________

Boris_Dieter:

Actually, between all the silliness, I've learned a lot from the folks that write here. I've gotten a bit unhinged at times, mainly from lack of sleep and a bit of sadness about how divided the country is. I like our country a lot, and I like it's people, and I hate a politics that basically pushes us apart in some very deep and scarring ways. But mostly I am struck by how smart and insightful lots of people are. As an old fart, I can tell you that this internet thing is one of the things about the contemporary world I really like.

____________________

Bigmike:

Basil

I did check out Wayne Morse. The name sounded vaguely familiar. Probably his anti Vietnam war positions and his being very outspoken about it. I give him credit for sticking to his convictions. It was an easy position to take at the time he did so.

Obama did the same with Iraq. One of the few things I give him credit for. Not that I agreed with him, but he didn't back down because of what the polls of the day said.

____________________

VA Yellow Dog:

@political_junki:

I live in a majority white neighborhood of Richmond, VA that was annexed by the city of Richmond (majority AA) 30 years ago. There is still residual resentment towards Democrats and AAs in this neighborhood because of the annexation. Still, Obama-Biden signs outnumber McCain-Palin signs on my street and throughout the neighborhood, but only narrowly (call it 5:4).

There is a lot of hope among Dems that Obama-Biden will carry VA this year, but that hope is tempered by VAs history of not having voted for a Democratic Presidential candidate since ’64. Bill Clinton thought he had a shot at carrying VA both in ’92 and ’96 but lost both times.

Here, as in so much of the country, it will all depend on GOTV. By all accounts, the Obama ground game in VA is much stronger than McCain’s.

GET OUT AND VOTE – Early if you can!

____________________

Boris_Dieter:

Well, Bigmike,

As an Obama supporter I have to point out that being opposed to the Iraq war outside of the senate is not the same thing as doing so from inside. I'll assume Obama would have done so had he been a senator at the time, but there's no way to know that. He'd of been more directly hit by the crappy intelligence and other pressure that senators faced.

____________________

Bigmike:

It was an easy position to take at the time he did so.

What a differnce it makes to not include the word NOT.

Corrected version.

It was not an easy position to take at the time he did so.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

Boris, I don't know. As the Congress broke for the election break, there was movement afoot to censure Lieberman for his shill-like support of McCain.

538 gives Dems a 1 in 3 chance of getting to 60, counting Lieberman. The odds are, however, on 57+Sanders=58. In that scenario, Lieberman is prob. more likely to get slapped with the Dem ire.

In any case, the odds are, Dems will need a Rep. peeling away from their whip to break the filibuster. The likelihood of Lieberman getting the reprimand/being kicked out from the Dem caucus are most likely exactly equal and inverse to the odds of Dems peeling off that rogue Republican from the R caucus.

____________________

Boris_Dieter:

Gnite y'all; getting ready for another round of calling for Obama manana.

____________________

The Dude:

What time does the Zogby phone poll come out? I thought it was around this time of the night.

____________________

Rollin08:

@Boris:

What "crappy intel"? Did a senator come out and tell us they had some bad intel? I think they all voted for it because it was polling well at the time. They were looking at the same stuff Powell came to the UN with.

____________________

vmval1:

I dunno guys, I feel a bit weirded out.

The national polls were great, but the golden standard (Ras) still shows a 4 point race.

The state polls didn't really show what we wanted them to today. Florida and NC are way too close for my liking.

Ed Rendell asking Obama and the Clintons to come back to PA worries me as well.

I have a question- when a pollster poll in states that have early voting, do they include the people who have already voted in their reported results, or are they collated separately?

____________________

Boris_Dieter:

@vmval1

Excuse me, but I believe Colin Powell now claims that the intel sucked. I don't know if it was "sexed" up, as some Brits claim, but we ALL know that the stuff was full of dung, or have you now located the weapons of mass destruction. Yes, the war was polling well, and that might have been part of the calculation for some of the senators, but unlike lots of people, I can't see into their heads. But it's apparent now that the intel was crap, and it's apparent that it didn't seem that way at the time. Hell, I was impressed by Powell's UN presentation, and I am a damn genius.

____________________

Basil:

MN

Actually, I think Boomshak is too attached to his name to make up another one for any reason at all. But he/she/it/they are such a fixture that parody is inevitable. A little bit of that goes a long way, though.

As to fake names, I think they're necessary just so cyberstalkers have more trouble crawling up the pipe that leads to one's PC. My own real name, Mxyzptlk, is too hard to pronounce anyway, forwards or backwards.

Boris

Ditto

Obama Tsunami!

____________________

vmval1:

@ Boris_Dieter:

????

____________________

Bigmike:

I live in Rep town. I think I have seen 2 Obama-Biden signs. Strange, since AR votes for a lot of Dems in statewide elections. Just not for Pres. The NW corner where I live is overwhelmingly Rep. Most of the rest of the state is Dem to some degree or another.

My home state is MO. I was there last week and saw bunches of McCain-Plain signs. But of course I was not in StL, KC, or Columbia (college town).

I grew up in a little town where the local newspaper is called the Democrat. Home district to Ike Skelton, who was a friend of my fathers. But I outgrew it, lol!

MO is a bellweather because the mix of rural/urban, racial percentages, income distribution, etc looks a lot like the nation as a whole. Note that bellweather and swing state are not always the same thing.

I knew McCain was in trouble when MO started turning some shade of blue, or at least became a toss up.

____________________

Rollin08:

I watched the UN presentation and thought it was BS. So did a lot of the members I think. I guess if you were already for the war it might have looked convincing..

____________________

McShame:

@ The Dude:

Zogby publishes his poll at 1 am Eastern.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

while we were chatting pollster took NC back. it's yellow again.

Basil:
"Actually, I think Boomshak is too attached to his name to make up another one for any reason at all. But he/she/it/they are such a fixture that parody is inevitable. A little bit of that goes a long way, though."

I agree with you on the fatalism of boom being eventually skewered, just surprised it took this long. What boom does, however, is a real mystery. He does seem to cycle through all five stages of grief recursively. One day he is in anger, next in denial, and then all of the sudden in acceptance. And then it starts all over again.

I don't know if he has enough time/sense of humor to make up an actual alter ego, an entirely different personality. Firstly, that takes time, and most of his posts are rushed and copied/pasted from right wing sites. Secondly, he does not seem capable of actual synthesis and analysis - these are all prechewed Rep. talking points he is spouting. And lastly is that sense of humor thing. I honestly can't tell you if he has it in him. I've seen nothing funny from him that would've been intentional, but I might be wrong on that.

"As to fake names, I think they're necessary just so cyberstalkers have more trouble crawling up the pipe that leads to one's PC. My own real name, Mxyzptlk, is too hard to pronounce anyway, forwards or backwards."

Which brings us to the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, I believe :). Look, alankeyeswhatever is a name that would be impossibly hard to type, and yet...no fewer than 3 imitators, according to my count. All you have to do is cut and paste.

But we digress :). I need to get some z's now.

Oh, but before I go, fwiw,
Florida and Ohio slipped back to yellow in the last couple of days. FL went from dark blue at that. So this in my book accounts from some of the national poll tightening during the last week, just like the poll rulebook says.

Now the polls have largely widened back to some of the largest leads we've seen in on the national levels: Gallup, Pew, NBC, CBS. Ras is lagging, but their 4-6 pts + real DEM advantage will get you to double digits fast. If that's the case, we ought to start seeing the state polls open up again next week. I would not be surprised if OH + FL swing back to light blue about a week from now.

That'd put us at > 350EV with less than a week to go. An enviable position, imho.

____________________

PlayingItStraight:

Virginia -- Folks be extremely wary of what polls are telling you about Virginia. Reality is that Virginia will be very close. I live in the "non-Virginia" part of Virginia, but have lived many years in other parts of the state. Obama's non Northern Virginia numbers are likely overstated in the polls ... and by the way if WPost has a poll showing him up by less than 8 right before the election, expect that McCain will re-color current expectations.

For instance, its too bad the CNU poll didn't give results on how demographic groups broke out. For instance, the poll had a sample of 58% women. 54% would be more like it.

It would be helpful if more people made their internals available. Extrapolating backwards allows you to look for consistency. When the internals generate a result on one side of the expected value on a regular basis, it would suggest that their is a methodological bias. And I think you are likely to see this bias where party weighting and gender are the key components.

Not sure but I think there is too much optimism expressed by many over Obama carrying VA.

PA -- Murtha may yet figure out a way to lose the state for Obama.

NC -- McCain may well carry. Dole is more likely to lose the state than McCain.

Lastly @boomshack

There is an issue than some people do miss on the tax issue.

As one who is "fortunate enough" to have NOT received a tax rebate check, who struggles to pay my kids tuition, who cannot deduct student loan interest, who loses the child tax credit and a share of other deductions, who is going to get screwed because of social security's redistribution scheme, I can feel some of your pain. Oh, and I forgot the alternative minimum tax. And I do resent it a bit when I hear someone say share the wealth. I ask, "what wealth?"

And I get really mad to hear the campaign justify using the tax system this way by pointing to payroll taxes. Heck, for years the party has defended SS as an insurance program. Now the party is saying to some, not only do you get a better deal on SS than someone who pays the max in taxes every year, but we're going to make those people pay your SS tax for you. You're going to get your SS for free. The party seems to be forgetting in its elation that everyone should have to pay something before you confiscate the fruits of someone else's labor.

____________________

Bigmike:

MNLatteLiberal

That'd put us at > 350EV with less than a week to go. An enviable position, imho.

No arguments from me. It looks better for the libs today. But I could live just fine with McCain in a squeaker.

Past my bedtime too guys.

____________________

Dana Adini:

Not to toot my own horn but this PA this is OLD NEWS. Here's my unpublished diary from October 16th in Dailykos....Hey, John King good job breaking the news. I'm no CNN reporter but it was obvious that this polls was "leaked" last week to Cobrett for a reason


unpublished draft: will be deleted 45 days after Oct 16, 2008 if left unpublished.

"We have witnessed 16 (i think) consecutive polls in Pennsylvania showing Obama leading McCain in double digits. So what the hell is McCain doing spending time and money there? What's even more puzzling is why is the Obama Campaign spending time there?

Many republican blogs have been circulating this rumor that an internal Obama poll in May fell into the hands of conservative talk show host Steve Corbett and it showed that Obama was only up by 2% in PA despite all of the polls showing otherwise. The republican claim that polls combined with the Murtha racist comment puts the state in play

In my opinion Republican stategists made a simple calculation after McCain started falling behind in the week following the GOP convention. It is imposible to defend 8 red battleground states and that these states will stay red is McCain came back in the national race. If he doesn't it makes no difference between a close loss and a landslide one.

Their calculation is that winning PA (which was in single digits) and NH can offset the loss of Ohio or Florida and if the Red states toe the line McCain can create a victory scenario. Of course they never imagined that Virginia would become solid blue and that PA would become a state out of reach.

Why is Obama there? Maybe they are playing along to distract McCain and keep him there. Maybe is leaked poll wasn't accidental after all. If McCain stays in PA he can't spread resources in red battleground states.

Other than that I can't understand either campaign's presence in Pennsylvania."

____________________

straight talk:

Ed Rendell does not like Obama! Remember that! Neither do Ted Strickland! IF obama had internals showing that Pa was a tie! He would be stompin in that state like a mad man! All of this PA noise is stupid! Barack is to smart not to forget about PA!

____________________

Dana Adini:

if those internals were right Barack would be spending the weekend in Hawaii. I think it was a diversion and McCain took the bait. Honestly they have no choice

____________________

Rollin08:

"But I could live just fine with McCain in a squeaker."

Man that would suck...

Democrats are definitely in a good position today though.

____________________

Dana Adini:

BTW Zogby is smart he was a non entity coming into t his election season....he went on Hannity told him the race was closer than the other pollsters. They gave him time because they were desperate gave him a link on drudge. He's the first polls out at 1 AM EST...He's not stupid he readjusted his sample weighting now he's same numbers as everyone else.... He's back in business thanks to Sean Hamnity

hahahaha suckers

____________________

TuftsPat:
____________________

Dana Adini:

zogby 52-42 Obama......lolololol

____________________

Rollin08:

Pollster John Zogby: "... These numbers, if they hold, are blowout numbers."

____________________

Dana Adini:

all these pundits were saying "McCain is in because Obama can't close the deal" " can't get over 50%"

Deal is getting ready to be closed title company is about to wire the money. "please send wiring instructions"

____________________

The Dude:

@Dana Adini: any idea what was Zogby's party weighting pre-post Hannity?

____________________

Dana Adini:

Pollster John Zogby: “Three big days for Obama. Anything can happen, but time is running short for McCain. These numbers, if they hold, are blowout numbers. They fit the 1980 model with Reagan's victory over Carter -- but they are happening 12 days before Reagan blasted ahead. If Obama wins like this we can be talking not only victory but realignment: he leads by 27 points among Independents, 27 points among those who have already voted, 16 among newly registered voters, 31 among Hispanics, 93%-2% among African Americans, 16 among women, 27 among those 18-29, 5 among 30-49 year olds, 8 among 50-64s, 4 among those over 65, 25 among Moderates, and 12 among Catholics (which is better than Bill Clinton's 10-point victory among Catholics in 1996). He leads with men by 2 points, and is down among whites by only 6 points, down 2 in armed forces households, 3 among investors, and is tied among NASCAR fans.”


tied among NASCAR fans...ship it

____________________

Basil:

TuftsPat

Thanks for the Zogby link. I'm loving it!

As I mentioned before, I can't understand why Obama doesn't have a triple digit lead now. As far as I can see, he's running unopposed.

Dana Adini

What a poetic, palindromic name. Are you related to Diana Naiad? Sorry, I'm just trying to maintain my tenuous grip on consensus reality while waiting for Nov. 4.

____________________

Dana Adini:

Zogby started out Dem + 1. not sure what it is now

____________________

Ryguy:

once again might i add, that while some people started freaking out last week i did try to calm everyone by saying that while the polls were tightening, the important thing was that obamas numbers remained around 50%. obamas strong support solidified weeks ago. mccain may move up and down based on how erratic he is during the next 2 weeks, but obamas numbers shouldnt move up or down much. hes at the 50% mark... thats the sign of someone whos going to win an election.

____________________

Dana Adini:

so according to zogby the only guys voting for McCain are white men between the age of 55-57 with Jewish mothers and Hindu fathers in the states of Utah or Wyoming.

____________________

Lechuguilla:

Those who think this election is a done deal for Obama need a history lesson.

Four years ago, it looked like Kerry would win. But the last weekend of the election, the BinLaden tape moved about four percent of voters from Kerry to Bush, for a 2.5 percent Bush win.

In 1980, Carter was leading by over 5 percent in the last week of race. In the last weekend of that election, a massive 15 point swing occurred toward Regan that allowed him to win by 10.

The last weekend before the election is absolutely crucial.

This year, we could see a last minute swing back in McCain's direction. Whether that would be enough to give him the win would depend on the magnitude of the swing.

Alternately, we could see a last minute swing to Obama that widens his lead to landslide proportions.

The final option is a static race, in which the last weekend sees no big movements one way or the other.

Just be advised that the final weekend of the campaign has the "potential" to drastically alter the current trend.

Lech

____________________

Dana Adini:

guys national polls very easy to measure. Take the state weightings of the 2004 elections apply today's RCP averages and you will get something close. I got around 50-43 Obama over the past 2 days. Not exact science since weighting have changes and state polls are not on same date but it's a 50,000 person sample.

____________________

Basil:

Indiana DA

That's everybody in Wyoming, isn't it? At least until Cheney goes back...

What are you incinerating?

____________________

Rollin08:

Dana Adini: "tied among NASCAR fans..."

Lol. Really, lately has been great. I'm loving every minute of it. After the last election we're really getting some payback here. It makes it all the better seeing Boomshak flounder around.

____________________

Dana Adini:

Lech,

don't compare to 2004. Kerry Bush were neck and neck the entire last week. Go to RCP and see how the pollsters got it right. Everybody knew that it would come down to Ohio and Kerry only conceded the following day.

The Carter-Reagan model serves Obama because it shows that the country over came late uncertainty and took a chance on an untested politician over a failed experienced leader.

It's really hard to see a scenario that gives McCain a victory in the EV. In addition, pollster in 1980 were not as good as they are today

____________________

Rollin08:

Hey Lech,

Yeah, enjoy it while it lasts. This is the first election I've followed the polls so closely so I'm not sure.

____________________

The Dude:

@Lechuguilla:

"...This year, we could see a last minute swing back in McCain's direction..."

Good word of caution BUT the difference is McSame has done nothing to give Americans the assurance to elect him. A plan for the economy...nope. Decision making aptitude...uh Palin...nada. Restoring American respectability around the world..."bomb bomb bomb Iran"...don't think so. The guy doesn't project the confidence of a Reagan nor does he have the discipline or ground game that W's team had.

____________________

Dana Adini:

Rollin08

after the last two elections I want a landslide soooooooooooooooooooo bad. I'm still on edge but I'm very confident. The Dem turnout in early voting states seals the deal IMO and the GOP knows it.

November 4th would be complete of Michele Bachmann can be defeated.

Scary witch

____________________

Dana Adini:

apropo Michele Bachmaann

reminds me a line from the song Good Morning Iran.

"Good morning Iran
here we will will live in fear"

She makes them look like moderates. Even Chris Matthews was shocked

____________________

Basil:

I see absolutely no way the turnout for Obama won't be huge (unless the voter rolls are purged, machines rigged, college kids intimidated, Iran bombed, martial law declared, aliens land, etc., etc.).

The idea isn't just to beat McCain and the Goddamned Oligarchic Pissants, it's to stomp their mofo asses into oblivion, where they belong.

OK, I'm venting. All I have to do is think about all those dead Iraqis and I turn into a Unitarian Jihadist.

____________________

common sense:

@ basil : I have heard that Diana Naiad is swimming from Keywest to GITMO in order to free Carly Fiorina. I'm sponsoring her swim with a matching contibution to the Calvin Coolidge Presidential Library. Care to join us ?

____________________

Amen Basil!

____________________

Dana Adini:

@Common Dana Adini is hotter than Diana Naiad Google us both and u will see

____________________

Ryguy:

so heres my favorite thing about the mccain PA strategy. after the hail mary victory he plans to get in the obama steady state, hes also going to need almost every other battleground state to reach 270. if he loses ohio or florida its over. if he gets both but loses virginia or north carolina and one other one its over. obama could technically lose PA (which wont happen) and still win the election a number of ways. thats how good things are for him right now.

____________________

alankeyesisawesome:

@common sense

I am reporting your post to the FBI, and your financial contribution towards this illegal activity will be dealt with appropriately.

____________________

gymble:

Anyone else want to see a Steel Cage Grudge Match between boomshak, boomshack, alankeyesisawesome, and alankeysisawesome? I'm pretty sure only one of them is for real, but it would be kind of fun to watch them try and out-troll the others ...

As for PA, McCain is there because it's the best Hail Mary pass he's got left. I kind of think that he's betting on riling up the racist vote. Also, it lets him concentrate on a single geographical region, which saves money and time and he doesn't have a lot of either left. What works in PA, will also work in Ohio, West Virginia, and Virginia. Of course, it's not a very GOOD option.

For Obama, how much time is he spending there relative to other states? As good as his lead is in PA, I wonder if there's some residual nervousness from the primary. PA, and states like it, are where he had the most trouble. So he may feel that his support is softer there than in other places.

____________________

Lech

Don't forget that the weekend before the election is Halloween. So maybe less people paying a great deal of attention. I think there'd have to be something happen for there to be a swing. Is that what your suggesting? If so then thats just speculation since none of us know if something bad will happen. Also theres been a grip of early voting where there wasn't in years past.

____________________

Dana Adini:

ryguy

things are sweettttttttttttttttttttt

____________________

Basil:

Common S

Put me down for for $5. I'm still trying to free the Indianapolis 500, though. One brick at a time...

WC

Pretty short message for so many constituents. :-)

BTW if you're not familiar with the Unitarian Jihad, google it. Very funny stuff. As a Gonzo Buddhist, I find it appropriately circumspect.

A typo in my previous post. Should be "mofo-ing asses," not "mofo asses."

____________________

Rollin08:

C'ya guys. I'll have to send that Michele Bachmaann video to my parents in MN. I mean how could it be so obvious who not to vote for? lol you learn something every day..

____________________

Lechuguilla:

Those who are worried about particular states like Pennsylvania or Virginia, need to focus on the national numbers, not the state numbers.

Here are the data for the 2004 presidential election.

Percent deviation from national average:

Virginia ......... R 3.0%

Pennsylvania ...........D 2.6%

Which means ....

If Obama won nationally by 6.0, the race in Virginia would be too close to call. In Pennsylvania, we would expect Obama would win by 8.6 percent (6.0 + 2.6).

Indeed, even given Rassmussen showing Obama ahead by 4 percent nationally, Pennsylvania would still go to Obama by roughly 6.6 percent (4.0 + 2.6). Pennsylvania is more Democratic than the nation as a whole (by 2.6%). Virginia is more Republican than the nation as a whole (by 3.0%).

Further, this same pattern existed in 2000, and 1996, and 1992, ... The overall pattern is very, very predictable.

Bottom line, with Obama leading nationally, McCain's chance of winning Pennsylvania is approximately ... zero! :)

Lech

____________________

Basil:

Dana

Jesus! I mean Moses! You're not kidding! Diana Naiad can go jump in the lake!

____________________

Lech

Are you taking into consideration the newest party registrations?

____________________

Lechuguilla:

Working Class ... "Are you taking into consideration the newest party registrations?

No.

That is what I would call an "intervening variable" that could help Obama, especially in a state like Virginia.

However, we've heard about increased party registration for years and years and years. Both parties tout it. I have yet to be convinced of its significance. But ...

It might be a tad more significant this year, given Obama's appeal to youth and to Blacks.

That's where state polls can augment the "percent deviation from the national average" data. And, I would be inclined to assign new registration some weight this year, especially in Southern states.

Moreover, I have seen data that suggest that state polls in the South tended to underestimate Obama's strength, during the primaries.

Lech

____________________

Basil:

OK, here it is. Long lines of people waiting at the polls on Nov. 4 (it seems unavoidable), murmuring...

Obama Tsunami!
Obama Tsunami!
Obama Tsunami!

...and maybe jumping up and down a little bit--in the politest way, of course.

A human wave of change.

____________________

gymble:

@Lech

How do you get a race too close to call in VA if Obama is up by 6 nationally? Wouldn't he end up by 3 in VA? (By the same logic that you used to get +8.6%)

____________________

straight talk:

To those who think this guy Obama is not tryin to win! He has a new fund raiser ad for his donors on his site and he has 133+mil in the bank! You know I want to see some polling on the 1 ev district of Omaha Nebraska because Hillary is campaigning there again tomorrow! I hear the GoTV effort by Obama is unprecedented! He is transporting college students to the polls! lol This guy will go down in history for running the most powerful campaigns ever!

____________________

common sense:

@ Basil : Now that we have momentum towards freeing Carly I am asking that we all pull together to get John McCain's principals back from the bastards who stole them. Five dollars is not enough. Colin Powell just pledged a Jackson.

____________________

Lechuguilla:

gymble,

"Wouldn't [Obama] end up by 3 in VA?

No.

Let's say nationally, it's Obama 50 & McCain 44, on the very last day before election.

I would assign Obama 50 - 3 = 47%.
I would assign McCain 44 + 3 = 47%.

To break the tie, I would see what the Virginia state polls looked like, consider new voter registration, and "probably" give Virginia to Obama by a narrow margin.


Lech


____________________

Basil:

@common

Michael or Jesse? They can have either.

____________________

common sense:

@ All of you : Colin Powell is man of great importance. Yes, he is not without resentment over his treatment by Bush . What the heck difference does that make. He spoke for me on Meet The Press. I am a dumb ass white guy with two degrees from a dumb ass school in South Bend Indiana.

____________________

Basil:

I agree. Powell's endorsement was impressive, despite his past shortcomings. As I watched, I was hoping Powell's gravitas would sway at least a few voters.

I also hoped Obama had a plan to roll out endorsements the same way he did superdelegates in the primary. Seems unlikely...

Compare Powell's endorsement with Limbaugh screaming into the mike that the endorsement was all about race. That's when you know you're on the right team.


____________________

common sense:

@ Basil : I went to bed but just had to reboot - General Powell said he would give me two Jacksons. One Andrew and one Tito. Good night. I think we are going to win.

____________________

burrito:

As long as this thread has changed to Zogby ... here are the Zogby numbers for 10/22 :

Obama 52
McCain 42

Obama up by 10 (and up 2 from yesterday) ...

____________________

Cho:

According to Zogby, Obama is up 27 among indepedents, that's very high. Zogby had him at +15 yesterday in that group.

____________________

Cho:

If you can trust Zogby's numbers, the movement is mostly due to Obama's surge among independents, weighting seems still pretty conservative, around DEM +2/+3.

____________________

HKFlashman:

ZOGBY: That One "leads with men by 2 points, and is down among whites by only 6 points, down 2 in armed forces households, 3 among investors, and is tied among NASCAR fans"
Tied among NASCAR fans??
Fat lady is opening her lungs...

____________________

mac7396:

Zogby still sucks, but the trend is nice.

____________________

abraxaf:

Lechuguilla, the only reason Reagan was able to gain so much in the last week in 1980 was that THE ONE AND ONLY presidential debate was one week to the day from the election and 100 million people watched it. That was voters first and sole opportunity to see the candidates side by side.

There's nothing comparable that could happen in this race at this point that I can conceive of which is why a McCain comeback is so unlikely. This has been one of the most followed elections ever and people know the candidates very well at this point.

____________________

jonny87:

lol! im joe the plumber

http://thepage.time.com/

____________________

mac7396:

Dkos also +10 O. Looks like 10 is the consensus of the day. Bad news for grampa.

____________________

jonny87:

@mac7396

wouldnt mind seeing a little uptick in rasmussen

____________________

bmrKY:

"boomshak:
Based upon Zogby's battleground polling, an 8 point lead nationally makes NO SENSE. McCain is within the MOE on every poll, how can he also be down 8 nationally?"

Because like everyone has already pointed out to you, bird brain, his state polling is done online. His national polling is done by phone. And ALL of his polling comppletely sucks. Zogby just sucks period. I don't care if he's a democrat. The guy still sucks, has always sucked, and will continue to suck even more in the future.

But he will still never suck as much as you, boom****.

____________________

Cho:

DKos result for yesterday only O +12

____________________

bmrKY:

"mac7396:
Dkos also +10 O. Looks like 10 is the consensus of the day. Bad news for grampa."

I'm John McCain and I approve of my ****ty poll numbers.

____________________

Vokoban:

Good morning, America. Just imagine the deafening sigh of relief on November 5th...

____________________

mysticlaker:
____________________

Thatcher:

NC Early vote totals as of 5:20AM today:

PARTY Total
DEM 354,999
LIB 309
REP 170,408
UNA 103,592
Total 629,308

AGE Total
18-30 68,355
30-44 111,870
45-59 188,410
60 and over 260,673
Total 629,308

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

LMAO @ bmrKY re: sucking.
thanks for making my morning brm. Well, the polls helped too.

____________________

vmval1:

I was so impressed with Powell's addressing the muslim issue. He expresses exactly what I felt pretty much the whole time.

____________________

JerryTheAngel:

This week McCain is going to claim the 3 point shot Senator Obama made playing basketball with the troops was only a 2 pointer. Senator Obama knew his foot was on the line. He can't be trusted. He's dishonest.

____________________

vmval1:

Not to get too carried away, but borrowing a phrase, look's like we're beginning to head into live boy or dead girl territory.

____________________

boomshack:

Thatcher:

NC Early vote totals as of 5:20AM today:

PARTY Total
DEM 354,999
LIB 309
REP 170,408
UNA 103,592
Total 629,308

There is something screwy with these poll numbers. They do not add up to an integer.
And what's the deal with LIBerals getting their own category? I would put all the DEMS into the LIB category.

Just goes to show you that the elderly are slower getting to the polls. The tar (tarhill state, HELLO?) can really reak havoc on those wheelchairs

____________________

Vokoban:

BoomshaCk is pretty good mimicking Boomshak...

Funny.

____________________

vmval1:

Let's play spot the outlier...


Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby 10/19 - 10/21 Obama +10
Rasmussen Reports 10/18 - 10/20 Obama +4
Gallup (Traditional)* 10/18 - 10/20 Obama +7
Gallup (Expanded)* 10/18 - 10/20 Obama +10
Hotline/FD 10/18 - 10/20 791 LV Obama +6
NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl10/17 - 10/20 Obama +10
ABC News/Wash Post 10/17 - 10/20 Obama +9
Ipsos/McClatchy 10/16 - 10/20 Obama +8
IBD/TIPP 10/16 - 10/20 Obama +6
Pew Research 10/16 - 10/19 Obama +14
GWU/Battleground 10/14 - 10/20 Obama +1

____________________

vmval1:

The folks at GWU must be high fiving and patting each other on the back saying how smart they all are.

____________________

boomshack:


NC Early vote totals as of 5:20AM today:

PARTY Total
DEM 354,999
LIB 309
REP 170,408
UNA 103,592
Total 629,308

Who IS this pollster? Nobody I EVER heard of. And just look at how he is favoring DEMS! Even commie dailyKOS gives them +6. And this guy is giving them 2 to 1 margin. REDICULOUS!
FAIL!

____________________

muckinello:

First two polls of the day show Obama improvement.
I am however worried about PA. I agree (for once)with Boom: it is closer than I wish. Notice how Rendell called for the Clintons to show up in PA. Notice also the call of Murtha. There are a ton of McCain signs in the country side.
Good thing the Obama camp has a ton of volunteers. I will be doing my part to make sure the morons and racists do not prevail.
What keeps me confident is that Obama can win and confortably without PA

____________________

muckinello:

Boom
you FAIL.
That's not a pollster, those are actual results of registered voters EARLY VOTES. NC has one of the best systems to keep track of that.
YOU FAIL, those are FACTS not ASSUMPTIONS

____________________

vmval1:

um mackinello...

____________________

vmval1:

you realise that the person who posted the post which you responded to is BoomshaCk and not Boomshak...


BoomshaCk is a parody of Boomshak

____________________

zotz:

Lechuguilla-
Bush beat Kerry in VA by 8% in 2004.
You say this:
"Here are the data for the 2004 presidential election.
Percent deviation from national average:
Virginia ......... R 3.0%"

Are you saying that Bush won nationally by 5%?
Besides the bad statistics your reasoning is wrong. To say that state elections will match the national election by the same proportion they did in 2004 assumes no change in the demographics which is obviously wrong. All those new Dem registration numbers should simply be dismissed?

I think you need some more classes in statistics!


____________________

boomshack:

muckinello:

Boom
you FAIL.
That's not a pollster, those are actual results of registered voters EARLY VOTES. NC has one of the best systems to keep track of that.

If it's supposed to be such a perfect system, how come they oversample Democrats so badly?! Tell me this, Mr. hotshot! This is very fishy. Very, very fishy!

____________________

muckinello:

@Vm
Whoops... I got suckered in ;)

____________________

boomshack:

zotz:
All those new Dem registration numbers should simply be dismissed?

YES! One word- ACORN does not fall far from the apple tree! As the saying goes, if you catch my drift.

____________________

vmval1:

its ok :D- watch out for the 3 versions of alankeysisawesome, alankeyesiswoesome and alankeyesiswinsome

____________________

Thatcher:

@vmval1 and muckinello -

You know, if Pollster would just ban the IP's for boomshak and alankeys ... this could mostly be solved.

____________________

Vokoban:

BoomshaCk,
I'm soooo catching your drift...

"Drifting, drifting, drifting away..." (E.Vedder)

____________________

vmval1:

@Thatcher

Are you kidding?!? Do you know how boring this would be without them?

____________________

zotz:

boomshack-
Clearly you are an insecure individual that needs constant attention. It's too bad your life is so empty that you have to resort to these antics. Please allow serious posters to have conversations without interruption from your buffoonish comments.

____________________

vmval1:

@zotz:

Look at my earlier comment re boomshak vs boomshaCk

____________________

vmval1:
____________________

Thatcher:

@vmval1 -

yeah - actually, get this ... it was boomshak (the original) that posted first that link on Pollster blogs yesterday. (Guess he saw the ads at the top of 538's page and thought it was a republican-leaning site).

____________________

Vokoban:

On a lighter note: I'm curious how Palin's latest fashion bill is received by Joe the plumber.

Steve Beenen & Hilzoy @ washingtonmonthly have two good takes on it:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_10/015304.php
and
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_10/015303.php

Vote McCain!

____________________

Thatcher:

@Vokoban -

As a way of comparison: Obama just bought five Hartmax suits for $1500 each. Now ... that is more than I would spend on a suit - but I am not a US Senator, and Hartmax has a tradition of suiting up Presidents, Vice Presidents and US Senators.

So ... think, Obama would have to buy 100 of those suits in less than 2 months months in order to match what has been spent on Palin.

____________________

Vokoban:

@ Thatcher

And I'm sure Obama paid for them from his own money.

____________________

Vokoban:

@ Thatcher

(btw: your name always gives me the creeps. Guess why... *g*)

____________________

mirrorball:

If it's supposed to be such a perfect system, how come they oversample Democrats so badly?!

Boom, either my sarcasm/humor meter is malfunctioning or you just aren't paying attention.

Go to the North Carolina Board of Elections home page and click any of those links that say "General Election Absentee stats," and you'll see real actual data. Not polling numbers. So there's nothing to "oversample." It's the real deal.

http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/

____________________

Vokoban:

@ mirrorball

You need to learn telling BoomshaCk from Boomshak. The latter is the original, the former the parody...

(C:

____________________

Thatcher:

@Vokoban -

Yes he did buy them with his own money.

As for the name ... yes, I'm a guy and that is my first name ... and for a short period of time in High School during the 80's my nickname was "Maggie" and "Margaret". Being a "D" and the son of a postal union worker, I'm actually named from the former Iowa State Secretary of Agriculture of Iowa (an "R") Thatcher Johnson. My mother saw his name in the Des Moines Register when he was a state senator for Iowa.

____________________

deeznutsrepubs:

For all you concerned about how rass is low :

9from 538)

"Track Record: Rasmussen rates as a strong pollster overall and did particularly well in 2004, though less well in this year's primaries."

- Rass (like many) is having a hard time estimating obama's support. Turnout and ground game will launch the landslide this election.


____________________

deeznutsrepubs:

For all you concerned about how rass is low for obama:

(from 538)

"Track Record: Rasmussen rates as a strong pollster overall and did particularly well in 2004, though less well in this year's primaries."

- Rass (like many) is having a hard time estimating obama's support. Turnout and ground game will launch the landslide this election.


____________________

Vokoban:

@ Thatcher
Nice story. I would donate 20 $ for it. But I'm a foreigner...

____________________

MDB1974:

Att. Obama Supporters: Remember what Barack said, "when you're last name is Obama you are always the underdog." The number right now are awesome. But this thing will NOT be in the bag till the polls let up. Keep pushing. The reps will not give up.

____________________

ZanzibarBuckBuckMcFate:

abraxaf:
Lechuguilla, the only reason Reagan was able to gain so much in the last week in 1980 was that THE ONE AND ONLY presidential debate was one week to the day from the election and 100 million people watched it. That was voters first and sole opportunity to see the candidates side by side.

There's nothing comparable that could happen in this race at this point that I can conceive of which is why a McCain comeback is so unlikely.

***

Exactly right. The sole Carter/Reagan debate of 1980 was a disaster for the incumbent democrat; his numbers began collapsing as soon as it was finished, and there was no time left to enact any kind of damage control or mount a counter-offensive. People had been looking for a reason to support Reagan, and the debate gave it to them. McCain has nothing left in the remaining week and and a half that could possibly move the numbers in that manner; in fact the last major event of this long election season is likely to be Obama's primetime address to the nation on the 29th.

On Kerry, we are discussing a substantially different landscape than the one we see today. Bush and Kerry were roughly tied (or Bush was slightly ahead) throughout the final month of the campaign. They were within a couple of points in the popular, with maybe a 30 or 40 point difference between them in the EV at any given moment. With that narrow a gap, it wouldn't take much to move the numbers to one side or the other, and it didn't. Also, Bush was the incumbent - the fundamentals of the 2004 race favored him. They clearly favor Obama in this cycle. Voter enthusiasm, voter identification, money... all positives for Obama.

____________________

masselo:

any word on ras this morning ?

____________________

Dan:

Deez, you are right about RAS. They were the only pollster to correctly predict all 50 states in 2004, and the only state outside their MOE was NJ, which Kerry won by only 6%. RAS does have VA, CO, and NV going blue this year (so far).

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

Vokoban,
(sorry, off-topic here)
you make the original Vladimir Vladimirovich proud! Hat's off to ya!
What's your favorite (outside of Lolita of course)?

____________________

Vokoban:

@ MNLatte

I'm very torn when it comes to Nabokov - actually that's why I took his name backwards. Some parts are sheer genius, others are - well - embarrassing. At least for my taste.

Apart from Lolita I take his short stories before his novels anytime.

Call me weird.

____________________

Angus Mc:

Don't know if it's true, but someone on another site says today's Ras is:
O: 51
M: 45

Which means Ras is now picking up on the same trend as the other tracking polls.

____________________

MNLatteLiberal:

@Vokoban,
It all depends where you draw the line between the novel and a short story. In Russia the novella genre is very popular, and imho Nabokov excelled in these very long short stories. And that's applicable for both his Russian and English periods, from the earliest Mashen'ka to Camera Obscura to others.

OK, back to the polls :)

____________________

mirrorball:

@Vokoban: Ah right. I saw there was a parody floating around out there, but I had my contacts out when I read that this morning. So I missed the extra letter. My bad.

____________________

Nick08:

I really dont want to hear anyoen complaining about MSM bias. John Mccain, Steve Schimdt, and his campaign spent the entire summer controlling the MSM news cycle, bringing up the most trivial of issues. Whether it was celebrity ads, and Paris Hilton, drill bab drill, Ayers, and Lipstick, and Pigs, and fake race card outrage, or suspending the campaign.

I think it all basically turned around when september 11 rolled around and the news outlets realize that with all that has been going on in the world, they had been covering lipstick on a pig the day before and the Mccain camp had been serving them up lies and stunts and using and manipulating them. And I think the Sarah Palin pick was just the icing on the cake. At some point we had to get to the real issues and once that happened the race shifted back to Obama.

____________________



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