poll numbers...

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
thought that some might like to see these numbers....it is an average of about 10 different polls.....


Obama 47.7.......McCain 43.9

Clinton 45.2.......McCain 46.9
 

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
thought that some might like to see these numbers....it is an average of about 10 different polls.....


Obama 47.7.......McCain 43.9

Clinton 45.2.......McCain 46.9

i believe once the debates start & the issues are discussed & dissected, people are going to see that obama is too inexperienced to be president & we'll see the the numbers dramactically change...the only hope for obama is if he makes mccain look too old to hold office...
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
i believe once the debates start & the issues are discussed & dissected, people are going to see that obama is too inexperienced to be president & we'll see the the numbers dramactically change...the only hope for obama is if he makes mccain look too old to hold office...

Agree. I am rooting for Obama against Hillary, because I like his energy, but I think he is WAY too liberal to win against McCain policy-wise.

His only chance to win is if people stay "swept up" in the excitment for 9 more months.
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,498
174
63
Bowling Green Ky
I'm with ya Feklhr--hope Obama gets H out of there--however will cost me on wager--but will have reward one way or another.

Agree will be much tougher on Obama in general election when he'll have to answer questions -unlike caucus. Think I can already see some of it coming and was wondering since your from CA--if you think this editorial in LA Times is a randon opinion from Obama supporter -or more of things to come.

Open letter to Barack Obama

A former Chicago constituent asks her candidate of choice to start talking real politics.
By Sarah M. Miller
February 15, 2008
I'm enclosing my third donation to your campaign because I believe strongly in your candidacy. But please, before you cash my check, consider my concerns:

I'm a University of Chicago graduate student, and I was your constituent when you were a state senator and when you became a U.S. senator. I know your strengths as a genuine progressive with a vision rooted in social justice movements and a trenchant critique of our political system. But I've lived in Southern California for the last few years, and as you saw on Feb. 5, a lot of people in California and around the country are unable to see in you what your current constituents do. Please stand up and distinguish yourself!

I hear smart, progressive, well-educated, politically engaged people out here saying - over and over - that you and Sen. Hillary Clinton are essentially the same. Even while giving you an enthusiastic endorsement, the Los Angeles Times recently stated that the two Democratic front-runners are "a hairsbreadth apart" on policy. I believe you are close on major policy issues but far apart on fundamental principles: executive power, financial transparency and ethics, philosophy of foreign diplomacy, commitment to reforming racist aspects of the criminal justice system, commitment to the 1st Amendment and a perspective that comes from community organizing rather than from corporate power and insider politics. My friends tell me, "You must know that from living in Chicago, because I'm not hearing that in the debates or in the campaign speeches."

Second, these smart progressive people are getting really cynical about the rhetoric of "hope" and "uniting people" when it's not backed up by substance. And there I have to sympathize with them. Hope is an empty diversion without substantive, original arguments on issues. When will you discuss rebuilding New Orleans? Can you offer creative thinking on the Iraq war as it currently exists, instead of just reminding people you opposed it years ago? Why don't you demonstrate a respectful, nuanced view of the Middle East instead of referring to the "the terrorists," as you did in a recent debate? How do you envision the United States' role in Africa's many dire problems and conflicts? How do you plan to fix our decrepit infrastructure and invigorate the economy in just and environmentally responsible ways? Will you argue for the value of a well-regulated, domestically produced food supply, favoring produce over commodity crops, for our safety and environmental health? What are your positions on international trade agreements? Do you have creative ideas for generating more affordable housing in our cities? And how will you handle the responsibilities of the presidency when you can't unite and persuade, as will inevitably happen sometimes?

When I express my support for your candidacy, people ask me these questions, and I can't answer them on your behalf. When I can't answer, I wonder if I too should be more skeptical of your visionary-but-vague rhetoric.

It's too late for me to sway any more California voters than I already did (and I swayed plenty to vote for you). But it's not too late for you to stand up and do it yourself in the primaries still to come. Please - we need you, yes, but we also need to know why to need you.

With continued commitment to you and your candidacy for president,

Sarah M. Miller

Sarah Miller is a University of Chicago graduate student who currently lives in Silver Lake.
 

escarzamd

...abides.
Forum Member
Dec 26, 2003
1,266
1
0
56
5ft, pin high......
I read that last nite at work DTB and was going to post it because its how I feel about him. He's got him self cornered a bit tactically taking the high road so far, but I don't see any reason he can't open up and show us how he got himself to this spot in history.

Its not like he's got no positions or plans for the issues we are facing. The info is there for all to see on-line. I just think he knows how good he is on the mic, and thats what "plays in Peoria" right now. Team Clinton should be very careful what they wish for in these debates, because he can think on his feet, he doesn't spew vitriol, and he may just be setting her up for the stutter-step-to-the-left hook blow in the arena she thinks she's got him covered in.......

He's way to cool a customer to make that one huge mistake every politician tries to avoid. I think his comportment thus far speaks volumes about his capacity to lead.......I get the inspirational part, but whats over-looked is his gravitas. With that, maybe he can get people to understand and embrace a new M.O. for a new world order:shrug: ?
 

THE KOD

Registered
Forum Member
Nov 16, 2001
42,499
263
83
Victory Lane
mccain_bush-hug-713122.jpg



this is all that needs to be said about the election results in 2008.

McCain is so far up Bushs ass he could carve a christmas turkey.

This is not change , this is status quo
 
Last edited:

AR182

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 9, 2000
18,654
87
0
Scottsdale,AZ
McCain is so far up Bushs ass he could carve a christmas turkey.

This is not change , this is status quo

scott...


mccain has been very critical of the amount of troops that were sent to iraq, & he has been against bush concering the handling of foreign prisoners just to name 2 things that he has disagreed with bush about.

but maybe i'm missing something about mccain.so can you give me examples of why you think mccain has his head up bush's ass ?
 
Last edited:

shamrock

Registered User
Forum Member
Aug 12, 2001
8,363
383
83
Boston, MA
there isn't many educated people on earth that could look worse than Bush in a debate, and he has been president for 8 years. Obama couldn't possibly look as bad as gw debating publicly.
 

smurphy

cartographer
Forum Member
Jul 31, 2004
19,913
138
63
17
L.A.
I think Obama would do very well against McCain. I look forward to it.
 

Eddie Haskell

Matt 02-12-11
Forum Member
Feb 13, 2001
4,595
41
0
26
Cincinnati
aclu.org
AR:

As the great Rod Stewart once said, "every picture tells a story, don't it." There seems to be a lot of love in that picture Scott posted.

Nosigar - I totally understand why you have a problem with a statement that contains the words"...smart, progressive, well educated, politically engaged people...".

Conversely, I would totally understand why you would not have a problem with a statement that contains the words "...stupid, regressive, un-educated, politically unengaged people...".

Eddie
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,498
174
63
Bowling Green Ky
there isn't many educated people on earth that could look worse than Bush in a debate, and he has been president for 8 years. Obama couldn't possibly look as bad as gw debating publicly.

Will agree with you Shamrock- GW sure wasn't elected and especially re-elected for his oral skills.

Kerry was much better and Obama better than Kerry IMO.

Believe he was elected because people thought him to be sincere when he spoke--and McCain much in the same mode.

Professional politicians from either party get where they do by being excellent speakers and pandering/knowing the right people--and their primary objectives are what will get them elected vs what they think is right--they tend to straddle every fence--

The key to exposing these sorts is when they are asked a question from someone seeking a yes or no answer on issue-they refuse to give one but will ramble at odds length avoiding definitive answer at all costs.
 
Last edited:

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
To young?? To old and thats what we may be stuck with. As long as we have a chance to get rid of all the Wash DC lifers. And im a fraid by old guy John is a lifer. I guess Obama good say to John if you don't mention there were two guys younger then me as prez.. I won't mention John you will be the oldest to start with ever. We don't need that old thinking do we?? So don't expect John to mention age. The press will do it for him.
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
Think I can already see some of it coming and was wondering since your from CA--if you think this editorial in LA Times is a randon opinion from Obama supporter -or more of things to come.

I think both parties primaries have been exercises in personality-posturing. Very little substantial policy has really mattered to voters so far.

But that's fine, it's a bit early to start the nitty gritty policy debates. Most people are happy picking a nominee based on "vision" "experience" "race" or whatever.

So yes, if Obama ends up being weak on policy, and can't paraly his "energy" and optomistic vision" into specifics, then he might have a problem with some folks.

But who knows? How many Americans break down all the issues and make a presidential choice that way? Or do more just pick the person they trust more, or want to have a beer with, or who their union or church tells them they should vote for?

Maybe the less candiates say, and the more they just stick to shaking babies and kissing hands, the better off they are? :shrug:
 

DOGS THAT BARK

Registered User
Forum Member
Jul 13, 1999
19,498
174
63
Bowling Green Ky
From my fav columnist-- Charles Krauthammer

Time for a rude awakening
Friday, February 15th 2008, 4:00 AM

(Page 1 of 2)

There's no better path to success than getting people to buy a free commodity. Like the genius who figured out how to get people to pay for water: bottle it (Aquafina was revealed to be nothing more than reprocessed tap water) and charge more than they pay for gasoline. Or consider how Google found a way to sell dictionary nouns - boat, shoe, clock - by charging advertisers zillions to be listed whenever the word is searched.

And now, in the most amazing trick of all, a silver-tongued freshman senator has found a way to sell hope. To get it, you need only give him your vote. Barack Obama is getting millions.

This kind of sale is hardly new. Organized religion has been offering a similar commodity - salvation - for millennia. Which is why the Obama campaign has the feel of a religious revival with, as writer James Wolcott observed, a "salvational fervor" and "idealistic zeal divorced from any particular policy or cause and chariot-driven by pure euphoria."

"We are the hope of the future," sayeth Obama. We can "remake this world as it should be." Believe in me and I shall redeem not just you but your country - nay, we can become "a hymn that will heal this nation, repair this world and make this time different than all the rest."

And believe they do. After eight straight victories - and two more (Hawaii and Wisconsin) almost certain to follow - Obama is near to rendering moot all the post-Super Tuesday fretting about a deadlocked convention with unelected superdelegates deciding the nominee. Unless Hillary Clinton can somehow do in Ohio and Texas on March 4 what Rudy Giuliani proved is almost impossible to do - maintain a big-state firewall after an unrelenting string of smaller defeats - the superdelegates will flock to Obama. Hope will have carried the day.

Interestingly, Obama has been able to win these electoral victories and dazzle crowds in one new jurisdiction after another, even as his mesmeric power has begun to arouse skepticism and misgivings among the mainstream media.

ABC's Jake Tapper notes the "Helter-Skelter cultish qualities" of "Obama worshipers," what Joel Stein of the Los Angeles Times calls "the Cult of Obama." Obama's Super Tuesday victory speech was a classic of the genre. Its effect was electric, eliciting a rhythmic fervor in the audience - to such rhetorical nonsense as "We are the ones we've been waiting for. [Cheers, applause.] We are the change that we seek."
That was too much for Time's Joe Klein. "There was something just a wee bit creepy about the mass messianism ... ," he wrote. "The message is becoming dangerously self-referential. The Obama campaign all too often is about how wonderful the Obama campaign is."

You might dismiss The New York Times' Paul Krugman's complaint that "the Obama campaign seems dangerously close to becoming a cult of personality" as hyperbole. Until you hear Chris Matthews, who no longer has the excuse of youth, react to Obama's Potomac primary victory speech with "My, I felt this thrill going up my leg." When his MSNBC co-hosts tried to bail him out, he refused to recant. Not surprising for an acolyte who said that Obama "comes along, and he seems to have the answers. This is the New Testament."

I've seen only one similar national swoon.

As a teenager growing up in Canada, I witnessed a charismatic law professor go from obscurity to justice minister to prime minister, carried on a wave of what was called Trudeaumania.

But even there the object of his countrymen's unrestrained affections was no blank slate. Pierre Trudeau was already a serious intellectual who had written and thought and lectured long about the nature and future of his country.

Obama has an astonishingly empty paper trail. He's going around issuing promissory notes on the future that he can't possibly redeem. Promises to heal the world with negotiations with the likes of Iran's President Ahmadinejad. Promises to transcend the conundrums of entitlement reform that require real and painful tradeoffs and that have eluded solution for a generation. Promises to fund his other promises by a rapid withdrawal from an unpopular war - with the hope, I suppose, that the (presumed) resulting increase in American prestige would compensate for the chaos to follow.

Democrats are worried that the Obama spell will break between the time of his nomination and the time of the election, and deny them the White House. My guess is that he can maintain the spell just past Inauguration Day. After which will come the awakening. It will be rude.

letters@charleskrauthammer.com
 

Eddie Haskell

Matt 02-12-11
Forum Member
Feb 13, 2001
4,595
41
0
26
Cincinnati
aclu.org
Why doesn't Chuckie write about how your boys have been selling the word "fear" for the last 7 years? Got them one election and billions of dollars in defense contracts for their friends and neighbors.

Eddie
 

djv

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 4, 2000
13,817
17
0
I see a AP artical today has comments from fellow senators about how fast John uses the F word. This comes from Reb's And Dem's both. In fact he called one a F-er. So age for him is he's just older but not smarter. In fact they call him quick tempered. Not Good to be close to the hot switch.
 

gardenweasel

el guapo
Forum Member
Jan 10, 2002
40,580
228
63
"the bunker"
Why doesn't Chuckie write about how your boys have been selling the word "fear" for the last 7 years? Got them one election and billions of dollars in defense contracts for their friends and neighbors.

Eddie

and that upsets you,doesn`t it edward?...after all,you and your bunkies crave billions from the bogus fisa lawsuits(despite there being no actual aggrieved plaintiffs)....

you want your piece of the pie....

i`ll be real curious to see what hillary or obama do after they get elected...

will they really permanently scale back the new ,updated fisa?...and the patriot act?...knowing that it,in reality,would make us more vulnerable...and no matter how they spin it,7 years without terror attacks at home on bush`s watch under fisa and the patriot act would look mighty appealing if we`re hit with another 9/11 on their watch....

particularly after stripping away these measures...much like bill and hill stripped away our military budget and intelligence capabilities during their watch....


that`s roling the dice bigtime...granted,if we got hit again,they`d probably have the media carrying their water ...trying to spin it toward bush and those that actually did the heavy lifting....

..but maybe not...the media loves to blame.....and if hillary wins a controversial primary election from obama and theres lingering bad feelings,who knows?...they may turn on her....

i think i can understand why they keep delaying a vote in the house...

1)they`re actually as stupid and politically blinded as i suspect they may be....or

2)they`ll finally come to their senses once the election is won and all the political posturing to appease the extreme left wing of the party becomes unnecessary......... after all,if they hit nyc or los angeles,that would cripple the democratic party(killing off around 30% of the democratic fund-raising base).....

i`m hoping that the latter,more responsible position is their plan....

one thing`s for sure....at least we`ll be safe from steroids in baseball and nfl teams taping the other teams signals....

wait a minute....that hasn`t been resolved either,has it?.........
 
Last edited:
Bet on MyBookie
Top