Post by: Manedwolf on February 22, 2008, 11:44:40 AM
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/22/nader-considering-another-white-house-run/#more-5508
Post by: johnster999 on February 22, 2008, 01:48:36 PM
Keep hope alive, Ralph!
Post by: AZRedhawk44 on February 22, 2008, 07:19:30 PM
Maybe we can screw this election up so much that whomever wins, he wins with a plurality/minority of votes and no clear mandate. I just can't stand any of 'em, including Paul.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 22, 2008, 07:31:53 PM
Post by: SomeKid on February 22, 2008, 09:28:16 PM
We can only pray that Ron Paul runs as a Libertarian or Independent. I know a lot of Ron Paul supporters who will be writing in Ron Paul rather than cast a ballot for anyone else. Myself included. Hopefully we can screw the GOP out of an election, unless they steal it with voter fraud like in 2000.
I had a long day. Can I borrow your Kool-Aid? It will surely alter my perceptions better than alcohol.
Post by: Fjolnirsson on February 22, 2008, 09:53:00 PM
Back to work!!!
Lol...
Post by: SomeKid on February 22, 2008, 11:03:26 PM
Somekid,
Back to work!!!
Lol...
Back to work!!!
Lol...
Hey! Your only the boss on ONE website.
Post by: Strings on February 23, 2008, 01:35:14 AM
Dude... don't they miss you over at DU?
Post by: Jamisjockey on February 23, 2008, 02:09:37 AM
We can only pray that Ron Paul runs as a Libertarian or Independent. I know a lot of Ron Paul supporters who will be writing in Ron Paul rather than cast a ballot for anyone else. Myself included. Hopefully we can screw the GOP out of an election, unless they steal it with voter fraud like in 2000.
Wah. Wwwwwaaaahhhhhhhh!
Post by: lupinus on February 23, 2008, 03:19:44 AM
Post by: AJ Dual on February 23, 2008, 05:36:59 AM
With his meaningless but well delivered speeches on "New Futures of Fuzzy Bunnies and Marshmallow Sunshine for All", I don't think Nader will have an impact that registers at the electoral college level.
Post by: Sergeant Bob on February 23, 2008, 06:16:13 AM
IMO, Nader will have a lot less traction against Obama than he would have against Hillary.
With his meaningless but well delivered speeches on "New Futures of Fuzzy Bunnies and Marshmallow Sunshine for All", I don't think Nader will have an impact that registers at the electoral college level.
With his meaningless but well delivered speeches on "New Futures of Fuzzy Bunnies and Marshmallow Sunshine for All", I don't think Nader will have an impact that registers at the electoral college level.
Quoted for truth. Nader has had very little real effect on previous elections and I doubt he'll have much on this one. Last election, a couple Kucinich supporters I know jumped to Nader when the Kook dropped out. I think thats pretty telling about Nader's support.
Post by: Bogie on February 23, 2008, 07:52:16 AM
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 23, 2008, 11:17:46 AM
Post by: Manedwolf on February 23, 2008, 11:24:44 AM
but if paul ran wouldn't that tarnish his integrity halo? after he said he wouldn't run as an independant he can't go back on his word like a politician. thinlk of all the cult members commioting seppuku by throwing them selves into their computer screens. the carnage is unimaginable. the college campus coffe shops would be deserted
More like their bodies would be found in many basements under piles of stale chee-tohs.
Post by: seeker_two on February 23, 2008, 01:53:36 PM
Actually, I think he'd affect Obama more... The youth/green vote, you know...
But....but Obama is the messiah.......Nader would drown in the water Obama walks on.....
Post by: De Selby on February 23, 2008, 01:57:57 PM
Obama vs. McCain is going to be no contest. Nader would need to get more votes than Ross Perot to make a difference in an election like that, and there's something he'll never do in his lifetime.
Post by: Manedwolf on February 23, 2008, 01:59:47 PM
For nader to be a spoiler, the election will have to be close.
Obama vs. McCain is going to be no contest. Nader would need to get more votes than Ross Perot to make a difference in an election like that, and there's something he'll never do in his lifetime.
Obama vs. McCain is going to be no contest. Nader would need to get more votes than Ross Perot to make a difference in an election like that, and there's something he'll never do in his lifetime.
Why, are voting for Obama?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 23, 2008, 02:15:53 PM
Post by: Zardozimo Oprah Bannedalas on February 23, 2008, 02:49:13 PM
Quote
you really imagine obama beating mccain?
Pretty sure national polls show that happening. There are Republicans who have a lot of loathing for McCain. It's a definite possibility that they won't vote at all. The Democrats will vote Democrat, and the Obama love ought to get good turnout on their side.If Obama wins, it'll be because Republicans stay home and say "to hell with it."
Post by: Manedwolf on February 23, 2008, 02:51:31 PM
Post by: De Selby on February 23, 2008, 05:58:17 PM
For nader to be a spoiler, the election will have to be close.
Obama vs. McCain is going to be no contest. Nader would need to get more votes than Ross Perot to make a difference in an election like that, and there's something he'll never do in his lifetime.
Obama vs. McCain is going to be no contest. Nader would need to get more votes than Ross Perot to make a difference in an election like that, and there's something he'll never do in his lifetime.
Why, are voting for Obama?
No.
But I'm reading the papers-it's pretty clear, if you look at the candidates, who is going to win a McCain vs. Obama race.
Post by: De Selby on February 23, 2008, 05:59:46 PM
you really imagine obama beating mccain? in the usa? you do know there are voters who don't live on campus right?
Yes-most voters don't live on campus, as far as I'm aware. And it seems that Obama is doing well amongst all sectors. He does better in red states than in blue, which is one big indicator as to how this election is going to turn when it goes national.
Post by: Manedwolf on February 23, 2008, 06:12:09 PM
you really imagine obama beating mccain? in the usa? you do know there are voters who don't live on campus right?
Yes-most voters don't live on campus, as far as I'm aware. And it seems that Obama is doing well amongst all sectors. He does better in red states than in blue, which is one big indicator as to how this election is going to turn when it goes national.
Only if you're watching MSNBC.
Post by: Bogie on February 23, 2008, 06:13:55 PM
Post by: De Selby on February 23, 2008, 06:14:05 PM
you really imagine obama beating mccain? in the usa? you do know there are voters who don't live on campus right?
Yes-most voters don't live on campus, as far as I'm aware. And it seems that Obama is doing well amongst all sectors. He does better in red states than in blue, which is one big indicator as to how this election is going to turn when it goes national.
Only if you're watching MSNBC.
On what channel was Obama's turnout poor or his political performance subpar?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 23, 2008, 06:19:34 PM
AdvertismentThe latest Rasmussen Reports survey of Election 2008 shows Republican frontrunner Senator John McCain with single-digit leads over Democratic Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. McCain now leads Clinton 48% to 40%. He leads Barack Obama 47% to 41%.
In a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted mid-January, McCain was two points behind Clinton, five behind Obama. A couple days later McCain won the South Carolina primary.
McCain has led Clinton in four of the last five polling match-ups conducted by Rasmussen Reports. He has had the edge over Obama in three of the last four polls. (see history and trends). Following his victory in Florida, Rasmussen Markets data indicates that McCain is the overwhelming favorite for the Republican Presidential nomination.
This weekend, Rasmussen Reports will begin daily tracking of general election match-ups featuring McCain vs. both Clinton and Obama.
Individual polls can sometimes overstate volatility in a race, especially during the ups and downs of a Primary Election season. This is especially true when the results carry a four percentage point margin of sampling error. One way of addressing this is to look at a rolling-average of three consecutive polls. Using this approach, McCain now has a narrow advantage over Obama 45% to 43%. Prior to this latest poll, they had been tied at 44%. Both men have now been within four points (the margin of error) of the 45% mark for seven consecutive individual polls. Using a three-poll rolling average, McCain leads Clinton by five percentage points, 47% to 42%.
In the new survey McCain enjoys an 22-point advantage among male voters with Clinton as his opponent. He lags by only three points among female voters. There isn't much gender discrepancy in the McCain-Obama match-up. Here McCain leads by eight points among men, five points among women.
McCain does better than either Democrat with unaffiliated voters in the new survey, but especially when Clinton is his opponent. Against the former First Lady, he leads 52% to 31% with unaffiliateds.
John McCain is viewed favorably by 52% and unfavorably by just 43%. His favorables have been in the 50%+ range since late November.
Hillary Clinton is currently viewed favorably by 47%, unfavorably by 51%. Barack Obama is viewed favorably by 51%, unfavorably by 45%.
Rasmussen Markets data gives Clinton a 14.8% chance of winning the Democratic nomination and Obama a 84.2% chance. On the Republican side, McCain is now given a 93.8% chance of winning the nomination while Mitt Romney is at 0.8%.Using a trading format where traders "buy and sell" candidates, issues, and news features, the Rasmussen Markets harness competitive passions to provide a reliable leading indicator of upcoming events. We invite you to participate in the Rasmussen Markets. It costs nothing to join and add your voice to the collective wisdom of the market.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 23, 2008, 06:19:55 PM
By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Thu Feb 14, 2008 at 03:18:19 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain (all tags) Share This:
Big Tent Democrat wrote earlier about the Quinnepac poll showing Hillary leading Barack Obama in Ohio, and PA. From the same poll, via MyDD, about a contest between McCain and Hillary and Obama:
Florida: McCain 44 percent - Clinton 42 percent; McCain 41 percent - Obama 39 percent;
Ohio: McCain 44 percent - Clinton 43 percent; McCain 42 percent - Obama 40 percent;
Pennsylvania: Clinton 46 percent - McCain 40 percent; Obama 42 percent - McCain 41 percent.
In Georgia, an Insider Advantage poll today shows:
McCain: 47 percent, Clinton: 40 percent
McCain: 48 percent, Obama: 40 percent
In both contests independent voters said they would vote for McCain by a 52 percent-to-30 percent margin. Among Democrats, 75 percent said they would vote for Clinton. Sixty-nine percent of Democrats said they would vote for Obama.
More...
MyDD contributor andrewalker08, a Georgia diarist adds to the post:
More than likely Georgia is lost for the General Election....I'm starting to ascribe to the belief that Barack Obama may not win a single state in the south, which contains at least a third of the 270 electoral votes needed to capture the White House.
Post by: De Selby on February 23, 2008, 06:24:29 PM
Dude, Obama hasn't even started campaigning against McCain and he's already breaking even in the states that would be toughest for him to win.
For the sake of your rent, don't put too much money on this McCain theory. The numbers just aren't there my friend.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 23, 2008, 06:33:53 PM
Post by: Bogie on February 23, 2008, 07:48:25 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on February 23, 2008, 08:06:46 PM
Obama doesn't have the political experience to hang in there when the going gets strange... He's going to slip up somewhere, and it's going to be on tape.
He really still has not said a damned thing but feelgood rhetoric.
Even some nooz sorts are beginning to ask "Well, WHAT is the change?"
That's where it'll get interesting.
Post by: De Selby on February 23, 2008, 08:40:58 PM
Obama doesn't have the political experience to hang in there when the going gets strange... He's going to slip up somewhere, and it's going to be on tape.
He really still has not said a damned thing but feelgood rhetoric.
Even some nooz sorts are beginning to ask "Well, WHAT is the change?"
That's where it'll get interesting.
Seriously, what electorate are you guys watching?
When is the last time an election was decided by hard questions posed after a night of really good rhetoric?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 23, 2008, 09:25:39 PM
cue the jaws sound track
Post by: Manedwolf on February 24, 2008, 05:20:53 AM
Quote
Nader enters presidential race
Ralph Nader is back for another White House campaign.
He made the announcement Sunday morning on NBC's Meet the Press. According to the Associated Press, Nader criticized the major parties' presidential contenders for failing to address corporate crime, Pentagon waste and labor rights.
The AP notes that some Democrats have blamed Nader for drawing Florida votes that might have otherwise gone to Al Gore in 2000. They're not likely to love him this time around either Votenader.org is already characterizing Nader as "Mr. Frugal" compared to Sen. Hillary Clinton.
Ralph Nader is back for another White House campaign.
He made the announcement Sunday morning on NBC's Meet the Press. According to the Associated Press, Nader criticized the major parties' presidential contenders for failing to address corporate crime, Pentagon waste and labor rights.
The AP notes that some Democrats have blamed Nader for drawing Florida votes that might have otherwise gone to Al Gore in 2000. They're not likely to love him this time around either Votenader.org is already characterizing Nader as "Mr. Frugal" compared to Sen. Hillary Clinton.
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/02/nader-enters-pr.html
Anything that siphons off a single Hilbama vote is fine with me!
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 24, 2008, 05:35:18 AM
and its just getting started
Conservatives Say Obama Lacks Patriotism
SLIDESHOW Previous Next
Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., left, and his wife, Michelle, wave as they take the stage during a South Carolina primary victory party in Columbia, S.C., in this Jan. 26, 2008 file photo. Obama's refusal to wear an American flag lapel pin has opened him to criticism from conservatives. Now his wife has drawn their ire too, for saying recently that she's really proud of her country for the first time in her adult life. (AP Photo/Steven Senne, File) (Steven Senne - AP)
Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill, points to the crowd after speaking at a campaign rally in Cleveland, Saturday, Feb. 23, 2008. (AP Photo/Jamie-Andrea Yanak) (Jamie-andrea Yanak - AP)
TOOLBOX
Resize Text
Save/Share + DiggNewsvinedel.icio.usStumble It!RedditFacebookPrint This E-mail This
COMMENT
No comments have been posted about this item.
Comments are closed for this item.
Discussion PolicyDiscussion Policy CLOSEComments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging? Links to this article
By NEDRA PICKLER
The Associated Press
Sunday, February 24, 2008; 7:34 AM
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Barack Obama's refusal to wear an American flag lapel pin along with a photo of him not putting his hand over his heart during the National Anthem led conservatives on Internet and in the media to question his patriotism.
Now Obama's wife, Michelle, has drawn their ire, too, for saying recently that she's really proud of her country for the first time in her adult life.
Conservative consultants say that combined, the cases could be an issue for Obama in the general election if he wins the nomination, especially as he runs against Vietnam war hero Sen. John McCain.
"The reason it hasn't been an issue so far is that we're still in the microcosm of the Democratic primary," said Republican consultant Roger Stone. "Many Americans will find the three things offensive. Barack Obama is out of the McGovern wing of the party, and he is part of the blame America first crowd."
Opponents of Sen. John Kerry proved in the 2004 election that voters are sensitive to suggestions that a candidate is not sufficiently patriotic. The Democratic presidential nominee's campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, even though he won multiple military honors and was lauded by his superiors.
The Swift Boat campaign started as a relatively small television ad buy that exploded into an issue that dogged Kerry for months. The Massachusetts senator has conceded since losing to President Bush that the campaign and his lackluster response to unsubstantiated allegations he considered unworthy of a reaction likely cost him the election. And the term even became part of the campaign lexicon _ swift boating.
Obama already is the subject of a shadowy smear campaign based on the Internet that falsely suggests he's a Muslim intent on destroying the United States. Obama is a Christian and has been fighting the e-mail hoax, which also claims he doesn't put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance, and he's been trying to correct the misinformation.
Post by: HankB on February 24, 2008, 08:02:51 AM
Hopefully we can screw the GOP out of an election, unless they steal it with voter fraud like in 2000.
I know I shouldn't respond to this . . . old news and all . . . but with endless manual recounts and the generation of nonexistent Algore votes using nonsense like "dimpled chads" and such, along with the attempt by Dems to take boxes and boxes of ballots into a locked room containing nobody but Dems . . . the obvious fraud wasn't on the part of the GOP.Dems typically accuse their opponents of the shady stuff they - the Dems - are doing themselves. And with media the likes of ABCNBCCBSCNNMSNBC, it usually works.
Post by: Bigjake on February 24, 2008, 09:39:50 AM
Why would you assume that a power-addicted woman who has shaped her entire life around this goal will go gracefully, and not burn down the party on her way out?
This is MY biggest hope for this election. The outcome isn't going to be good no matter who wins, so we might as well be entertained. I'm hoping Obamarama ding dong can get her back into shrill/screechy/ I'M MADDER THAN HELL AND NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE mode....
Added, since the radio is doing a 90's weekend, Obama's little cult seems similar to the same pseudo-religious fervor of a Creed concert. No, I've never been to one.
Post by: Manedwolf on February 24, 2008, 01:35:44 PM
Why would you assume that a power-addicted woman who has shaped her entire life around this goal will go gracefully, and not burn down the party on her way out?
This is MY biggest hope for this election. The outcome isn't going to be good no matter who wins, so we might as well be entertained. I'm hoping Obamarama ding dong can get her back into shrill/screechy/ I'M MADDER THAN HELL AND NOT GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE mode....
Added, since the radio is doing a 90's weekend, Obama's little cult seems similar to the same pseudo-religious fervor of a Creed concert. No, I've never been to one.
He got applause at a speech for blowing his nose.
Post by: Bigjake on February 24, 2008, 05:07:38 PM
Post by: Paddy on February 24, 2008, 05:38:38 PM
Pitiful.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on February 24, 2008, 06:14:55 PM
Post by: Bogie on February 24, 2008, 06:29:54 PM
Post by: De Selby on February 24, 2008, 06:32:25 PM
The Democrats are _really_ hoping that they're going to be able to fragment the Republican vote by 5-6%, from folks being encouraged to write in folks like Fred or Huck or He Who Should Not Be Named.
Look at the polls and look at the candidates. They don't need a third party on the other side to win.
The past 8 years have really, really trashed the conservative engine that got going in the 90's.
Post by: Perd Hapley on February 24, 2008, 06:39:35 PM
Post by: De Selby on February 24, 2008, 06:40:35 PM
Nader will be a non-starter. Democrats are stupid, but they learned their lesson in 2000.
About that one anyway-they sure didn't learn the lesson about running lackluster candidates with poor campaign skills....see 2004
Post by: Strings on February 24, 2008, 07:08:28 PM
It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if Hillary destroyed the Democrats on her way out after loosing the nomination (not saying it WILL happen, but rather that it MIGHT VERY WELL happen)...
Post by: Pew pew pew on February 24, 2008, 10:19:00 PM
I don't think you can point to '04 as proof that the Dems "didn't learn the lesson about running lackluster candidates with poor campaign skills". Personally, I really think '04 was a throw-away, with the intention of running Hillary this go-round. Obama, I'm kinda thinking, was an unseen possibility.
It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if Hillary destroyed the Democrats on her way out after loosing the nomination (not saying it WILL happen, but rather that it MIGHT VERY WELL happen)...
It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if Hillary destroyed the Democrats on her way out after loosing the nomination (not saying it WILL happen, but rather that it MIGHT VERY WELL happen)...
The only thing a Hillary implosion would do at this point is galvanize Obama's support. People may prefer Hillary over Obama at this point - Lord knows why - but if she were to throw a tantrum that would simply solidify Obama's position.
Post by: seeker_two on February 25, 2008, 12:56:21 AM
Nader will be a non-starter. Democrats are stupid, but they learned their lesson in 2000.
Nader doesn't stand a chance. I'd be suprised if he gets as much press as Ron Paul in the next six months....
Post by: Manedwolf on February 25, 2008, 03:49:51 AM
I don't think you can point to '04 as proof that the Dems "didn't learn the lesson about running lackluster candidates with poor campaign skills". Personally, I really think '04 was a throw-away, with the intention of running Hillary this go-round. Obama, I'm kinda thinking, was an unseen possibility.
It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if Hillary destroyed the Democrats on her way out after loosing the nomination (not saying it WILL happen, but rather that it MIGHT VERY WELL happen)...
It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if Hillary destroyed the Democrats on her way out after loosing the nomination (not saying it WILL happen, but rather that it MIGHT VERY WELL happen)...
The only thing a Hillary implosion would do at this point is galvanize Obama's support. People may prefer Hillary over Obama at this point - Lord knows why - but if she were to throw a tantrum that would simply solidify Obama's position.
And what if her people dig up the dealer Obama bought his nose candy from when he was younger?
Post by: Sawdust on February 25, 2008, 05:46:33 AM
Sawdust
Post by: Tecumseh on February 25, 2008, 08:59:04 AM
but if paul ran wouldn't that tarnish his integrity halo? after he said he wouldn't run as an independant he can't go back on his word like a politician. thinlk of all the cult members commioting seppuku by throwing them selves into their computer screens. the carnage is unimaginable. the college campus coffe shops would be deserted
Not as bad as McCain and his lies about the USS Liberty. I am sure the McDonalds would be deserted as well.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 25, 2008, 09:00:21 AM
Quote
you really imagine obama beating mccain?
Pretty sure national polls show that happening. There are Republicans who have a lot of loathing for McCain. It's a definite possibility that they won't vote at all. The Democrats will vote Democrat, and the Obama love ought to get good turnout on their side.If Obama wins, it'll be because Republicans stay home and say "to hell with it."
I am encouraging everyone I know not to vote for McCain as he is a traitor and a liar.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 25, 2008, 09:02:42 AM
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
AdvertismentThe latest Rasmussen Reports survey of Election 2008 shows Republican frontrunner Senator John McCain with single-digit leads over Democratic Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. McCain now leads Clinton 48% to 40%. He leads Barack Obama 47% to 41%.
In a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted mid-January, McCain was two points behind Clinton, five behind Obama. A couple days later McCain won the South Carolina primary.
McCain has led Clinton in four of the last five polling match-ups conducted by Rasmussen Reports. He has had the edge over Obama in three of the last four polls. (see history and trends). Following his victory in Florida, Rasmussen Markets data indicates that McCain is the overwhelming favorite for the Republican Presidential nomination.
This weekend, Rasmussen Reports will begin daily tracking of general election match-ups featuring McCain vs. both Clinton and Obama.
Individual polls can sometimes overstate volatility in a race, especially during the ups and downs of a Primary Election season. This is especially true when the results carry a four percentage point margin of sampling error. One way of addressing this is to look at a rolling-average of three consecutive polls. Using this approach, McCain now has a narrow advantage over Obama 45% to 43%. Prior to this latest poll, they had been tied at 44%. Both men have now been within four points (the margin of error) of the 45% mark for seven consecutive individual polls. Using a three-poll rolling average, McCain leads Clinton by five percentage points, 47% to 42%.
In the new survey McCain enjoys an 22-point advantage among male voters with Clinton as his opponent. He lags by only three points among female voters. There isn't much gender discrepancy in the McCain-Obama match-up. Here McCain leads by eight points among men, five points among women.
McCain does better than either Democrat with unaffiliated voters in the new survey, but especially when Clinton is his opponent. Against the former First Lady, he leads 52% to 31% with unaffiliateds.
John McCain is viewed favorably by 52% and unfavorably by just 43%. His favorables have been in the 50%+ range since late November.
Hillary Clinton is currently viewed favorably by 47%, unfavorably by 51%. Barack Obama is viewed favorably by 51%, unfavorably by 45%.
Rasmussen Markets data gives Clinton a 14.8% chance of winning the Democratic nomination and Obama a 84.2% chance. On the Republican side, McCain is now given a 93.8% chance of winning the nomination while Mitt Romney is at 0.8%.Using a trading format where traders "buy and sell" candidates, issues, and news features, the Rasmussen Markets harness competitive passions to provide a reliable leading indicator of upcoming events. We invite you to participate in the Rasmussen Markets. It costs nothing to join and add your voice to the collective wisdom of the market.
Can you post the source? Its hard to evaluate the validity of what you are saying without telling us where you got it from.
AdvertismentThe latest Rasmussen Reports survey of Election 2008 shows Republican frontrunner Senator John McCain with single-digit leads over Democratic Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. McCain now leads Clinton 48% to 40%. He leads Barack Obama 47% to 41%.
In a Rasmussen Reports poll conducted mid-January, McCain was two points behind Clinton, five behind Obama. A couple days later McCain won the South Carolina primary.
McCain has led Clinton in four of the last five polling match-ups conducted by Rasmussen Reports. He has had the edge over Obama in three of the last four polls. (see history and trends). Following his victory in Florida, Rasmussen Markets data indicates that McCain is the overwhelming favorite for the Republican Presidential nomination.
This weekend, Rasmussen Reports will begin daily tracking of general election match-ups featuring McCain vs. both Clinton and Obama.
Individual polls can sometimes overstate volatility in a race, especially during the ups and downs of a Primary Election season. This is especially true when the results carry a four percentage point margin of sampling error. One way of addressing this is to look at a rolling-average of three consecutive polls. Using this approach, McCain now has a narrow advantage over Obama 45% to 43%. Prior to this latest poll, they had been tied at 44%. Both men have now been within four points (the margin of error) of the 45% mark for seven consecutive individual polls. Using a three-poll rolling average, McCain leads Clinton by five percentage points, 47% to 42%.
In the new survey McCain enjoys an 22-point advantage among male voters with Clinton as his opponent. He lags by only three points among female voters. There isn't much gender discrepancy in the McCain-Obama match-up. Here McCain leads by eight points among men, five points among women.
McCain does better than either Democrat with unaffiliated voters in the new survey, but especially when Clinton is his opponent. Against the former First Lady, he leads 52% to 31% with unaffiliateds.
John McCain is viewed favorably by 52% and unfavorably by just 43%. His favorables have been in the 50%+ range since late November.
Hillary Clinton is currently viewed favorably by 47%, unfavorably by 51%. Barack Obama is viewed favorably by 51%, unfavorably by 45%.
Rasmussen Markets data gives Clinton a 14.8% chance of winning the Democratic nomination and Obama a 84.2% chance. On the Republican side, McCain is now given a 93.8% chance of winning the nomination while Mitt Romney is at 0.8%.Using a trading format where traders "buy and sell" candidates, issues, and news features, the Rasmussen Markets harness competitive passions to provide a reliable leading indicator of upcoming events. We invite you to participate in the Rasmussen Markets. It costs nothing to join and add your voice to the collective wisdom of the market.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 25, 2008, 09:12:09 AM
I don't think you can point to '04 as proof that the Dems "didn't learn the lesson about running lackluster candidates with poor campaign skills". Personally, I really think '04 was a throw-away, with the intention of running Hillary this go-round. Obama, I'm kinda thinking, was an unseen possibility.
It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if Hillary destroyed the Democrats on her way out after loosing the nomination (not saying it WILL happen, but rather that it MIGHT VERY WELL happen)...
It wouldn't suprise me in the slightest if Hillary destroyed the Democrats on her way out after loosing the nomination (not saying it WILL happen, but rather that it MIGHT VERY WELL happen)...
The only thing a Hillary implosion would do at this point is galvanize Obama's support. People may prefer Hillary over Obama at this point - Lord knows why - but if she were to throw a tantrum that would simply solidify Obama's position.
And what if her people dig up the dealer Obama bought his nose candy from when he was younger?
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 25, 2008, 01:46:22 PM
the pathos of children posting from fort sofa calling him a traitor is quite amusing. heck most of em too nadless to even go peacecorps or i might be too harsh might not be a nad issue could just be a manifestation of total self absorption
Post by: Perd Hapley on February 25, 2008, 02:28:35 PM
Quote
what lie did mccain tell regarding the liberty?
It's some nonsense he got from LAK or some-such. It will never be brought up by the Obama campaign.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 25, 2008, 02:44:54 PM
Post by: Finch on February 25, 2008, 09:30:19 PM
His "Gook" comment.
The Keating Five.
McCain-Feingold
His support for a war that a majority of Americans don't support.
His beach boys parody - "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran"
Yeah, this guy is golden. I can see a Democratic administration in our future, especially if this is the only thing the GOP can puke up. We need to hurry up and start this country over again.
Post by: LAK on February 25, 2008, 10:04:34 PM
------------------------------------
http://searchronpaul.com
http://ussliberty.org/oldindex.html
http://www.gtr5.com
http://ssunitedstates.org
Post by: Tecumseh on February 26, 2008, 09:06:28 AM
what lie did mccain tell regarding the liberty? and pray tell what undergrad court of paulistas convicted him of treason?
the pathos of children posting from fort sofa calling him a traitor is quite amusing. heck most of em too nadless to even go peacecorps or i might be too harsh might not be a nad issue could just be a manifestation of total self absorption
What no-degree court of McDonalds working GOP members found him innocent?
the pathos of children posting from fort sofa calling him a traitor is quite amusing. heck most of em too nadless to even go peacecorps or i might be too harsh might not be a nad issue could just be a manifestation of total self absorption
Post by: Tecumseh on February 26, 2008, 09:08:38 AM
There is plenty to destroy McCain on.
His "Gook" comment.
The Keating Five.
McCain-Feingold
His support for a war that a majority of Americans don't support.
His beach boys parody - "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran"
Yeah, this guy is golden. I can see a Democratic administration in our future, especially if this is the only thing the GOP can puke up. We need to hurry up and start this country over again.
Well that is hopefully enough, in the end though we as US citizens should try to make the world more aware of his racist ways. Not to mention his hatred of our country and its values.
His "Gook" comment.
The Keating Five.
McCain-Feingold
His support for a war that a majority of Americans don't support.
His beach boys parody - "Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran"
Yeah, this guy is golden. I can see a Democratic administration in our future, especially if this is the only thing the GOP can puke up. We need to hurry up and start this country over again.
Post by: roo_ster on February 26, 2008, 11:44:05 AM
oh i read that drivel. kinda scary i try to remember if i was like that at that age. i asked the old man he said no. by that age i had been supporting myself for 5 years was married washes the foolish away
Yeah, supporting one's self & kids are helpful in that regard.
A stint in the military is also of use when cleaning the feces from one's ears.
Self-support, kids, & military service all help one realize that the world does not revolve around one's self.
===============
I find a lot to tear into McCain for, but using "gook" is not one of them. He earned the right to call his captors any damn thing he wants to.
Same goes for WW2 vets: I care not a whit if the terms, "kraut" or "jap" pass their lips.
================
The idea of college twits passing judgment on McCain as a traitor would be hilarious were the judges not so pathetic.
Post by: Tecumseh on February 26, 2008, 02:36:37 PM
oh i read that drivel. kinda scary i try to remember if i was like that at that age. i asked the old man he said no. by that age i had been supporting myself for 5 years was married washes the foolish away
Yeah, supporting one's self & kids are helpful in that regard.
A stint in the military is also of use when cleaning the feces from one's ears.
Self-support, kids, & military service all help one realize that the world does not revolve around one's self.
===============
I find a lot to tear into McCain for, but using "gook" is not one of them. He earned the right to call his captors any damn thing he wants to.
Same goes for WW2 vets: I care not a whit if the terms, "kraut" or "jap" pass their lips.
================
The idea of college twits passing judgment on McCain as a traitor would be hilarious were the judges not so pathetic.
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on February 26, 2008, 02:43:45 PM
You can't possibly be serious...
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 26, 2008, 02:46:59 PM
Post by: Tecumseh on February 26, 2008, 03:04:04 PM
Huh? You're trying to argue that McCain isn't a war hero because he called his captors "gooks"?
You can't possibly be serious...
I am not saying he is not a hero. I just dont think racist language is appropriate on behalf of a presidential candidate.
You can't possibly be serious...
Post by: Finch on February 26, 2008, 03:13:11 PM
Huh? You're trying to argue that McCain isn't a war hero because he called his captors "gooks"?
He is not a war hero because he is not a war hero. Not because he called people Gooks.
Post by: cassandra and sara's daddy on February 26, 2008, 03:17:20 PM
Post by: Manedwolf on February 27, 2008, 08:23:25 AM
Huh? You're trying to argue that McCain isn't a war hero because he called his captors "gooks"?
You can't possibly be serious...
I am not saying he is not a hero. I just dont think racist language is appropriate on behalf of a presidential candidate.You can't possibly be serious...
You know what?
Anyone who fought in WWII probably referred to "Nips" and "Krauts".
Just like anyone who fought in Vietnam probably said "Gooks".
When you fight an enemy, when they're trying to kill your friends every day, you might come up with uncomplimentary slang for them. And in all those cases, you'll notice, they tend to be one-syllable words, the sort that could be yelled in warning of an approaching enemy during a fight.
Not that I'd expect you to know anything about that.
Post by: Matthew Carberry on February 27, 2008, 09:08:58 AM
Don't think I've heard "gook" used outside of a vet's "remember when" story in 20 years.
Post by: Manedwolf on February 27, 2008, 09:10:22 AM
and, in such cases, the usage is almost entirely contextual, not general. Don't hear a lot of "nips and krauts" out of WWII vets unless they are reminiscing.
Don't think I've heard "gook" used outside of a vet's "remember when" story in 20 years.
Don't think I've heard "gook" used outside of a vet's "remember when" story in 20 years.
Unless they were held prisoner by and tortured by, etc...
I can see a little resentment over that. I don't agree with a lot of the guy's stances, but I am not going to fault him for some resentment against his former torturers.
I'd only care if it affected his current foreign policy decisions, or if he showed indication that he was "still there" mentally, and unfit for office.
Post by: Paddy on February 27, 2008, 09:42:25 AM