 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular Views on Obama
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Sawzaw Date: 26 Sep 08 - 08:26 AM Full of what? Insight? I forgot to quote the Socialist Workers as saying they were going to march in Obama's inaugural parade. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 26 Sep 08 - 09:09 AM "He said he didn't think it was necessary to drop the debate." In view of the fact that this debate was supposed to focus on foreign policy, I found the whole think a little puzzling. This is where McCain should excel. If this debate is cancelled, the next one is about domestic policy, where he wouldn't do as well. There are a few people out there who probably think McCain is doing this for the good of the country, but not many. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out. Reports show that this is helping him in the polls. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 26 Sep 08 - 09:14 AM It seems to me that McCain, by stating he would not attend the debate IF there was no resolution ( given that the Dems want a debate) was giving the Dems encouragement to come to a resolution. The Dems have shown that they want to continue Bush's policies, and the rest of the Republicans want a change from those policies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Sep 08 - 09:49 AM The Dems want to continue BUSH's policies? WHat pol,icies are you thinking of? Are you nuts? "The Congressional plan, then, looks a lot better — a lot more adult — than the Paulson plan did. That said, it's very short on detail, and the details are crucial. What prices will taxpayers pay to take over some of that toxic waste? How much equity will they get in return? Those numbers will make all the difference. And in any case, it seems that we don't have a deal. This has to be a bipartisan plan, and not just at the leadership level. Democrats won't pass the plan without votes from rank-and-file Republicans — and as of Thursday night, those rank-and-file Republicans were balking. Furthermore, one non-rank-and-file Republican, Senator John McCain, is apparently playing spoiler. Earlier this week, while refusing to say whether he supported the Paulson plan, he claimed not to have had a chance to read it; the plan is all of three pages long. Then he inserted himself into the delicate negotiations over the Congressional plan, insisting on a White House meeting at which he reportedly said little — but during which consensus collapsed. The bottom line, then, is that there do seem to be some adults in Congress, ready to do something to help us get through this crisis. But the adults are not yet in charge. " NYT |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 26 Sep 08 - 09:52 AM Presently, the Republicans seem to be expressing the viewpoint of the majority of the ctizens- NO BAILOUT. Bush and the Dems are not in accord with popular opinion. Bodes well for the election. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Sep 08 - 10:12 AM That's not what the Republicans are presenting Bruce. See this description. You Manichean debbil. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 26 Sep 08 - 10:19 AM "Republican lawmakers offered a plan calling for Wall Street firms to purchase insurance on mortgage-backed securities and advocating tax cuts and relaxed regulations. Treasury officials had previously rejected a plan focusing on insurance in favor of one that purchased troubled assets, Cantor said. " "Dodd said on CNN that the Republican plan threatens to force negotiations to begin anew. He said the White House meeting ``looked like a rescue plan for John McCain for two hours, and it took us away from the work we were trying to do today.'' Obama suggested the talks were damaged by politics. ``When you start injecting presidential politics into delicate negotiations you can actually create more problems rather than less,'' Obama said on CNN. McCain's Campaign McCain's campaign said more negotiations were needed to draft legislation that would pass Congress. ``There is not yet a majority of Democrats and Republicans who are willing to vote yes for anything,'' said Steve Schmidt, a senior adviser to McCain's campaign. Kevin Smith, a spokesman for House Republican Leader John Boehner, said the speed with which Dodd's plan was put together was designed ``to deny Senator McCain a role in trying to craft a bipartisan solution.'' " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 26 Sep 08 - 12:55 PM Rationalizing Obama's Defeat You must know the old joke: A young man returns home from a job interview at a radio station, dejected. His mother sees his sunken face and understands immediately that something has gone wrong. "My son! The sport's announcer's job—you didn't get it? Nobody knows more about sports than you! How could they reject you?" The son: "Mom, it was anti-sss …. anti-ssssssss … anti-sssssssssss … anti-SSSSEMMM-itism." Democrats are already preparing their excuses for the possible defeat of Barack Obama in November. That was an important column Bob Shrum just wrote. True, the column offers Barack Obama unfortunately little guidance as to how to win the election. But it does offer an all-purpose excuse if Obama should lose: racism. Some might say that five weeks in advance is a little early to be developing rationalizations for defeat. And others might say that a candidate who has consistently led in almost every poll since early summer has little need for rationalizations. But those who say these things do not know the Democratic Party! Maybe I am unfair here, but to an outsider it seems that Democrats see these quadrennial presidential contests not as trials between two parties with the voters deciding, but as trials of the voters! Are the voters good enough, decent enough, unprejudiced enough to vote Democratic? Or will they succumb to their lower natures and vote Republican? At the end of Hunter S. Thompson's book on the 1972 campaign, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, Thompson listens to the news reports declaring Richard Nixon's re-election and thinks: "Okay, we are a nation of used car salesmen." Not for him the thought that there might have been anything wrong with George McGovern or the party that nominated him! If I fail … it shows there's something wrong with you. That mode of thinking is obviously very condescending. Less obviously, it is very self-defeating. Suppose the voters are just as lunk-headed as Thompson and (depending on the outcome) Bob Shrum believe. What follows? Yes, another couple of decades of massive illegal immigration may well create a very different electorate. Until then, however, these are the voters you have got. The only route to political power is through convincing them; abusing them does not help with that work. Even more counter-productive, the blame-the-voters mindset relieves candidates of responsibility for developing and articulating acceptable policies. Barack Obama faces other challenges in this campaign than his race. Obama is running as the more pacifist candidate in a country where the more nationalist candidate has won every presidential election since 1816. He is running as the more economically collectivist candidate in a country where the more economically individualist candidate has won seven of the 10 elections since 1964. He is a more remote and inaccessible personality and he has a radically less impressive resume than his rival. His personal story not only lacks the heroism of John McCain's, but it is punctuated with odd gaps and unanswered questions. Obama still has not delivered a fully plausible account of his relationships with such figures as Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright. Perhaps the most immediately damaging fact about Obama's candidacy, however, was his decision not to reach out to his principal party rival, even though she won very nearly as many Democratic votes as he did. Obama may be The One. But he is far from a perfect candidate, regardless. And Democrats do neither him nor themselves any favors when the only flaws they can see are the flaws in this democracy's ultimate decision-makers: their employers, the voters. DAVID FRUM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Sep 08 - 01:20 PM Jeeze, you come up with some pure-dee crap sometimes. I'm preparing for the election of Obama. Compared to John McCain he's the only viable option. Mister Frum is speaking from a dark, bent corner, it seems to me. Lofty conclusions of great weight with very luittle foundation to them do not make for a lively analysis. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 26 Sep 08 - 01:24 PM Amos: "I'm preparing for the election of Obama. Compared to John McCain he's the only viable option." Jeeze, you come up with some pure-dee crap sometimes. THAT order makes some sense. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Sep 08 - 03:50 PM Ya know, Brucie, the more practiced you become at twisting other people's words out of spite, the more you will slip out of ocmmunication, and the more bitter you will grow. I'm sorry I spoke harshly, but hell, you know where all my buttons are. I think I have asked you ten times not to engage in this infantile mockery like a fifth-grader on a bad recess day. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Sep 08 - 04:11 PM General Election: McCain vs. Obama RCP Electoral Map | Changes in Electoral Count | Map With No Toss Ups | No Toss Up Changes Polling Data Poll Date Sample Obama (D) McCain (R) Spread RCP Average 09/18 - 09/25 -- 48.2 44.2 Obama +4.0 Gallup Tracking 09/23 - 09/25 2736 RV 48 45 Obama +3 Rasmussen Tracking 09/23 - 09/25 3000 LV 50 45 Obama +5 Hotline/FD Tracking 09/23 - 09/25 912 RV 49 42 Obama +7 GW/Battleground Tracking 09/21 - 09/25 1000 LV 46 48 McCain +2 CBS News/NY Times 09/21 - 09/24 LV 48 43 Obama +5 FOX News 09/22 - 09/23 900 RV 45 39 Obama +6 NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl 09/19 - 09/22 1085 RV 48 46 Obama +2 ABC News/Wash Post 09/19 - 09/22 780 LV 52 43 Obama +9 LA Times/Bloomberg 09/19 - 09/22 838 LV 49 45 Obama +4 Ipsos-McClatchy 09/18 - 09/22 923 RV 44 43 Obama +1 CNN/Opinion Research 09/19 - 09/21 697 LV 51 47 Obama +4 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Sep 08 - 04:33 PM Washington Dispatch: Why some of Bush's intel professionals are now working for a Democrat—and how they'd reform the CIA. Part Two in a series on the candidates' national security policies. By Laura Rozen (Mother Jones News September 25, 2008 As has become painfully clear since 9/11, intelligence is only as good as the worldview of the person receiving it. The team of former intelligence professionals who have come together to advise Barack Obama describe a candidate who they believe is open-minded and intellectually inclined to absorb information—not just the recognized current threats (terrorism, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, a resurgent and more belligerent Russia), but the ones on the horizon (nuclear terrorism, water wars, climate change and the conflicts it could generate). But they also are urging him to rethink the architecture of the intelligence community to grapple with both current and emerging threats, and to do away with the Bush administration's legacy of excessive secrecy and its tendency to view complex international challenges in black-and-white terms. "The world is a very complicated place and there are not always easy solutions to a lot of the problems out there," says John Brennan, a top Obama intelligence advisor and former senior CIA official who co-founded the Terrorist Threat Integration Center and the National Counterterrorism Center, a post-9/11 effort to integrate the US government's terror threat intelligence. "If you look at the world in black and white, you miss a lot of the subtleties out there. 'Either with us or against'—the world is not divided into good and evil a lot of time. Despite America's military might, a lot of these problems do not lend themselves to kinetic solutions"—i.e. the use of force. And world dynamics are likely to get more complicated and nuanced, not less, by 2025. An intelligence forecast being prepared by the US intelligence community for the next president "envisions a steady decline in US dominance in the coming decades, as the world is reshaped by globalization, battered by climate change, and destabilized by regional upheavals over shortages of food, water and energy," according to the Washington Post. Obama himself articulated his approach to intelligence in a speech in July. "It's time to update our national security strategy to stay one step ahead of the terrorists," Obama said at Indiana's Purdue University. "It's time to look ahead—at the dangers of today and tomorrow rather than those of yesterday." But even though matters such as politicized intelligence, torture, domestic surveillance, and preventing terror attacks are among the most controversial issues of the Bush legacy, intelligence has remained largely a stealth topic in the presidential campaign. Intelligence advisers to Obama say the topic's relative absence may actually be appropriate: "This is not an issue for the campaign," says one former White House official now advising Obama. Adds a former senior CIA operations officer who is also a member of the campaign's intelligence working group: "The only way we can correct it is to have a bipartisan, national interest audit of what it's currently doing, figure out what works, and make the best recommendations and implement them. And you don't want to see this pitfall the election." Aside from Brennan, the campaign's intelligence working group (which is coordinated by former National Security Council official Rand Beers) spans a range of national security professionals who have served in senior leadership, operational and legal positions in the National Security Council, CIA, and defense intelligence agencies, including many who served both Republican and Democratic administrations. Among them: Former CIA deputy director John McLaughlin, former senior CIA operations officers Art Brown and Jack DeVine, retired Ltn. Gen. Claudia Kennedy, retired Ltn. Gen. and former head of the Defense Human Intelligence Service Donald Kerrick, former CIA lawyer and special advisor to the CIA director Kenneth Levitt, former CIA general counsel Jeff Smith, former CIA Near East division chief Robert Richer, and former CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson. Former CIA lawyer and Clinton-era NSC official Mary McCarthy has stepped back from her previous role coordinating the group due to private sector work demands. One participant described the group's priorities for a prospective Obama administration to me this way: "The intelligence community is a complete mess. Intelligence reform—try to fix it. Improve morale. CIA is dysfunctional. Rectify a lot of stuff that was done by executive order in secrecy, and bring more transparency. Better protection of civil liberties. Improve oversight of CIA on these activities." Meanwhile, national security experts in the McCain camp characterize their candidate as a Washington veteran who doesn't need a working group to advise him on the issues. "John has been in town for three plus decades," says Gary Schmitt, a former executive director of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board who occasionally contributes advice to the McCain campaign. "McCain is his own guy and he has been his own guy. McCain can pick up the phone and call [former deputy secretary of state] Rich Armitage whenever he wants." But some of Obama's intelligence advisors say their experience with the recent administration has shown that leaders who think they already know it all can lead to disaster. "Old man Bush was a great guy," says one veteran intelligence officer now supporting Obama, who requested anonymity. "He was truly interested and sensitive to intelligence. But this Bush administration has done terrible damage to the intelligence business. They have operated a perpetual campaign, treated intelligence as a political tool, and never fully appreciated why it must be non-partisan and objective and can't be tampered with." "It's time," he continued, "for a very serious change." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Sep 08 - 05:18 PM David Frum is a right wing fanatic who is a complete embarrassment to the majority of Canadians. His mother used to be a CBC newsperson of considerable stature here. I hope he remains in the USA for good and gets a key spot in the new Orwellian propaganda ministry when the fascist police state-in-the-making down there in Washington becomes an officially recognized fact. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Sawzaw Date: 26 Sep 08 - 06:59 PM Method....................Obama...McCain Latest Poll Per State......238.....266 Poll of Polls..............270.....265 Survey USA.................159.....269 Rasmussen Reports..........228.....259 Quinnipiac.................131......51 Research 2000...............42......95 Zogby......................335.....131 National Average...........45.2%...43.5% Weighted Nat'l Avg.........44.8%...46.0% |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 26 Sep 08 - 07:26 PM It looks like the debate gate scam turned things around for McCain. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Sep 08 - 08:24 PM Interesting that you chpoose to hide the source of that data, Sawz. You desperate? Here's "Real Clear Politics" summary across the polls: Poll Date Sample Obama (D) McCain (R) Spread RCP Average 09/21 - 09/25 -- 47.9 43.7 Obama +4.2 Gallup Tracking 09/23 - 09/25 2736 RV 48 45 Obama +3 Rasmussen Tracking 09/23 - 09/25 3000 LV 50 45 Obama +5 Hotline/FD Tracking 09/23 - 09/25 912 RV 49 42 Obama +7 GW/Battleground Tracking 09/21 - 09/25 1000 LV 46 48 McCain +2 CBS News/NY Times 09/21 - 09/24 LV 48 43 Obama +5 FOX News 09/22 - 09/23 900 RV 45 39 Obama +6 Marist 09/22 - 09/23 689 LV 49 44 Obama +5 So...where's your contrary data coming from, and of what date is it? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 27 Sep 08 - 09:24 PM Today that number is up from 4.2 to 4.3. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 28 Sep 08 - 01:36 PM Sunday's update: Gallup Tracking 09/25 - 09/27 2719 RV 50 42 Obama +8 Rasmussen Tracking 09/25 - 09/27 3000 LV 50 44 Obama +6 Hotline/FD Tracking 09/25 - 09/27 914 RV 47 42 Obama +5 GW/Battleground Tracking 09/21 - 09/25 1000 LV 46 48 McCain +2 CBS News/NY Times 09/21 - 09/24 LV 48 43 Obama +5 FOX News 09/22 - 09/23 900 RV 45 39 Obama +6 Marist 09/22 - 09/23 689 LV 49 44 Obama +5 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Sawzaw Date: 28 Sep 08 - 04:46 PM FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Saturday, September 27, 2008 Contact: Jessica Robinson, 573-751-0290 Gov. Blunt Statement on Obama Campaign’s Abusive Use of Missouri Law Enforcement JEFFERSON CITY - Gov. Matt Blunt today issued the following statement on news reports that have exposed plans by U.S. Senator Barack Obama to use Missouri law enforcement to threaten and intimidate his critics. “St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch, St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce, Jefferson County Sheriff Glenn Boyer, and Obama and the leader of his Missouri campaign Senator Claire McCaskill have attached the stench of police state tactics to the Obama-Biden campaign. “What Senator Obama and his helpers are doing is scandalous beyond words, the party that claims to be the party of Thomas Jefferson is abusing the justice system and offices of public trust to silence political criticism with threats of prosecution and criminal punishment. “This abuse of the law for intimidation insults the most sacred principles and ideals of Jefferson. I can think of nothing more offensive to Jefferson’s thinking than using the power of the state to deprive Americans of their civil rights. The only conceivable purpose of Messrs. McCulloch, Obama and the others is to frighten people away from expressing themselves, to chill free and open debate, to suppress support and donations to conservative organizations targeted by this anti-civil rights, to strangle criticism of Mr. Obama, to suppress ads about his support of higher taxes, and to choke out criticism on television, radio, the Internet, blogs, e-mail and daily conversation about the election. “Barack Obama needs to grow up. Leftist blogs and others in the press constantly say false things about me and my family. Usually, we ignore false and scurrilous accusations because the purveyors have no credibility. When necessary, we refute them. Enlisting Missouri law enforcement to intimidate people and kill free debate is reminiscent of the Sedition Acts - not a free society.â€쳌 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 28 Sep 08 - 04:56 PM Friday's update CORN - - - - - - - - - - 5430 9/26 - 12:40 SOYBEANS - - - - - - - - - - 11640 9/26 - 12:40 WHEAT (DAY) 7456 7560 7580 7450 -194 7652 9/26 - 12:25 LEAN HOGS 69625 69100 69675 68900 350 69275 9/26 - 12:17 LIVE CATTLE 100950 101200 101250 100500 0 100950 9/26 - 12:17 COTTON 5806 5864 5864 5864 -115 5921 9/26 - 23:00 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 28 Sep 08 - 06:36 PM Sawzall: What on earth is all that gibberish about, in actiual fact? No. 6: What are you doing? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 28 Sep 08 - 07:46 PM Trying to find a distinction between live cattle and Democrats, obviously. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 28 Sep 08 - 11:31 PM What am I doing?? Posting Friday's closing of the agriculture future's quotes and prices. It is a lot more meaningful than all the polls of the carny election. And somewhat easier to read if I don't say so meself. :) biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 29 Sep 08 - 12:47 AM Well, start a thread on the subject, Bill. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 29 Sep 08 - 06:46 AM I think my postng of the future's prices is quite appropriate in this thread Amos. Those prices are tangible. They reflect 'what' one pays. The poll figures are not tangible. If people base on who would make the best president, or who is right or wrong based on poll figures for outcome of their vote they are being led astray. The issues are what matters ... people should pay more attention to the issues ... not to the carny predictions for their decicion. Polls are a media deception to influence the vote. biLL :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Emma B Date: 29 Sep 08 - 08:37 AM Would you say reading polls is baffling, somewhat baffling, totally baffling, beyond baffling, all of the above? Wal-Mart shoppers are with John McCain. The Starbucks crowd is divided. 'These are among the findings of a poll conducted by National Public Radio, not necessarily associated with Sam's Club in most people's minds, in 14 critical battleground states.' About this time of every election year the publication of political polls starts taking on a life of its own. Like the undead in those 1950s movies. They're everywhere -- who's up among playground supervisors, why isn't the Democrat doing better among car salesmen, dog-lovers love McCain, wine-sippers prefer Obama, not every woman votes the same You wade through all those numbers and age groups and economic criteria and that +/- stuff and you're not in there. You simply don't exist. Apparently, you are unique on the planet. And, anyway, by tonight you'll hear about another poll that totally contradicts what you just heard at breakfast from that female TV anchor whose hair never moves.' Mark Silva - as reported in the Los Angeles Times |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,number 6 Date: 29 Sep 08 - 08:45 AM Emma ... exactly .. good post. Thank you. biLL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 29 Sep 08 - 08:48 AM Yeah, it sounds like he's got a pretty good handle on it! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 29 Sep 08 - 10:36 AM The electoral arithmetic looks brighter for Obama September 30, 2008 Page 1 of 2 | Single Page View THOSE who fear that democracy is losing its vigour in the modern West should have been reassured by the first debate between the US presidential candidates. Not because of anything that emerged from the debate itself, for it revealed almost nothing that was not already known about the two candidates and their views. But because, if polls are any guide, American voters are beginning to show a real shift in their allegiance. And that shift seems to be based not on what the candidates had to say to each other, or on what spin doctors had to say about it, but on the voters' own assessment of what is happening in their country. In American presidential elections, the vote that matters is not the tally of popular support for each candidate, but the number of delegates that the candidates win in the electoral college that formally chooses the president. The Democratic candidate, Barack Obama, has long performed well in estimates of the national popular vote: he reportedly leads his Republican rival, John McCain, by an average of 5% across all polls. But Senator Obama has struggled to win enough support in the states he is likely to need to win to secure an electoral-college majority. This week, however, for the first time in several months, the polls show that if the election were held now the electoral college votes in one of those crucial states, Virginia, would go to the Democratic candidate. The balance has also swung in another state that had hitherto inclined to the Republicans, North Carolina. Senator McCain has a slight edge in Ohio, a "swing" state that the eventual victor is expected to have to win, but the evidence is that the college count is shifting in favour of the Democrats. ..." From The Age.com |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Alice Date: 29 Sep 08 - 10:45 AM I regularly receive Zogby surveys. Among the questions asked each time are who I last voted for for president, who I plan to vote for for president, how likely I will vote, how interested I am in politics, whether I am a NASCAR fan, whether I attend religious services, how often if ever I shop at WalMart, whether any family is a member of a union, whether any family member is in the military. These are all questions regarding demographics that are routinely part of the polling. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Emma B Date: 29 Sep 08 - 11:01 AM 'The way that polling and demographics slice up the population is, ultimately, a matter of preference; it does not derive from, but is a presupposition of, the "science." Searching for segments of the electorate that vote as a bloc, demographers split the population up into groups they decide are important or salient. And their decisions don't necessarily reflect empirical results -- they are more an index of THEIR OWN social attitudes, presumptions and prejudices. It would be nearly as scientific to rig up any segment of the population and regard it as decisive: blue-collar women, black and white, under 35; black men plus Latino women; left-handed divorcees. When you bring a set of racial or gender-based categories to the data, the divisions these attitudes represent will always be confirmed as the most important divisions in our society. That just reinforces the problematic divisions that infested the attitudes of the pollsters in the first place. And then, at the end of each election, our divisions of race, gender and class are, in our imaginations, stronger. The right response to the notion that "scientific polling" shows that the election outcome turns on white men or black women or soccer moms is a shrug of the shoulders and the arch of an eyebrow.' 'Polling's fuzzy math' by Crispin Sartwell (a teacher philosophy at Dickinson College in Carlisle, Pa., and is the author of the forthcoming "Against the State: an Introduction to Anarchist Political Theory.") |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 29 Sep 08 - 11:13 AM The reason I prefer the Real Clear Poltiics poll treport is that they average the values froma dozen polls across the nation. Of course they may still be missing important demographics (such as 20-30 somethigns with only cell phones), but it's the best representation of poll-based information you can get. RCP Average 09/21 - 09/28 -- 47.9 43.3 Obama +4.6 Rasmussen Tracking 09/26 - 09/28 3000 LV 50 45 Obama +5 Gallup Tracking 09/25 - 09/27 2719 RV 50 42 Obama +8 Hotline/FD Tracking 09/25 - 09/27 914 RV 47 42 Obama +5 GW/Battleground Tracking 09/22 - 09/28 1000 LV 46 48 McCain +2 CBS News/NY Times 09/21 - 09/24 LV 48 43 Obama +5 FOX News 09/22 - 09/23 900 RV 45 39 Obama +6 Marist 09/22 - 09/23 689 LV 49 44 Obama +5 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 29 Sep 08 - 02:45 PM Obama offers some well-deserved bitch-slaps to McCain A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 29 Sep 08 - 02:48 PM McCain says Obama policies will deepen recession By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent 1 hour, 15 minutes ago COLUMBUS, Ohio - Lagging in the polls, Republican presidential candidate John McCain unleashed a blistering attack Monday on his Democratic rival, saying the race comes down to a simple question: "Country first or Obama first?" In his first public appearance since Friday night's debate, McCain said Democrat Barack Obama advocates tax-and-spend policies that "will deepen our recession," and voted against funding for equipment needed by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. "That is not putting the men and women of our military first," he said. McCain stressed his own record of opposing Republicans on key issues, and said, "When it comes time to reach across the aisle and work with members of both parties to get things done for the American people — my opponent can't name a single occasion in which he fought against his party's leadership to get something done for the country. That is not putting the interests of the country first." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 29 Sep 08 - 04:33 PM Obama lead over McCain steady at 8 percent, new poll shows "Barack Obama maintains a sizeable lead over John McCain in the presidential race, according to the latest Gallup daily tracking poll. The poll, which had McCain ahead in the race just weeks ago, and has shown a close race through much of the summer, now indicates that registered voters are favoring Obama over McCain by a 50 percent to 42 percent margin. The latest tracking poll would take into account initial reactions to Friday's debate, as well as Sarah Palin's recent interview with Katie Couric. It would also take into account the building, dire, financial credit news, though not the failure of the bailout bill on first vote. Now, as always, it's a poll, national, not state by state, it is still September, etc... Lot's of reasons not to read too much into any poll. But, this is the second day in which Obama has attracted 50 percent support, a rare number for either candidate to reach in this race. These numbers would indicate that the number of undecided voters is 8 percent. the polls margin for error is +/- 2 percent, so the results are outside that margin." (Kansas City Star) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor Date: 29 Sep 08 - 04:41 PM Well Bruce, If McCain talks about the economy, it must be true; especially if it is self serving. :-) I notice that he didn't say that he plans to double down on the policies that got us in this mess to begin with. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 29 Sep 08 - 06:21 PM The NRA needs to get started with their advertising program. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 29 Sep 08 - 07:28 PM Bailout ushers in the era of Obama |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 29 Sep 08 - 07:40 PM Exactly, Amos... Change has allready come... The Reagan era is over... Boss Hog, as I have predictedm isn't so comfy these days... But it had to happen... There is only but so much wealth to go around and we are beyond the tipping point in how it has been unfairly distributed... So, regardless of the outcome of this election, hang on 'cause the pendelum is swinging back... I guess the only sticky point will be if McCain is elected and he has to pick a Supreme Court judge... That will be a war because that could be a change that would put the Supreme Court on the wrong side of popular opinion... But hopefully we won't have that scenerio... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Sawzaw Date: 29 Sep 08 - 11:57 PM "And I’ll protect Social Security, while John McCain wants to privatize it," Obama said in a speech in Daytona Beach, Fla., on Sept. 20, 2008. "Without Social Security half of elderly women would be living in poverty â€" half. But if my opponent had his way, the millions of Floridians who rely on it would’ve had their Social Security tied up in the stock market this week. Millions would’ve watched as the market tumbled and their nest egg disappeared before their eyes. Millions of families would’ve been scrambling to figure out how to give their mothers and fathers, their grandmothers and grandfathers, the secure retirement that every American deserves. So I know Senator McCain is talking about a 'casino culture' on Wall Street â€" but the fact is, he’s the one who wants to gamble with your life savings." McCain has, in the past, supported plans that would allow workers, only if they want to, to have a portion of their Social Security put into personal retirement accounts that allow investment in the stock market. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Sawzaw Date: 30 Sep 08 - 12:37 AM "The fact is that although we have had a president who is opposed to abortion over the last eight years, abortions have not gone down.'' The New York-based Guttmacher Institute reported in January 2008 that in 2005 the country's abortion rate fell to 19.4 abortions per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44, continuing a trend that started after the abortion rate peaked in 1981 at 29.3. The institute, a think tank on reproductive health issues, reported that the number of abortions also fell, to 1.2-million in 2005, which it said was 25 percent below the record high of 1.6-million abortions in 1990. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 30 Sep 08 - 09:22 AM Secret, Foreign Money Floods into Obama Campaign Monday, September 29, 2008 9:23 PM By: Kenneth R. Timmerman ... Foreign Donations And then there are the overseas donations -- at least, the ones that we know about. The FEC has compiled a separate database of potentially questionable overseas donations that contains more than 11,500 contributions totaling $33.8 million. More than 520 listed their "state" as "IR," often an abbreviation for Iran. Another 63 listed it as "UK," the United Kingdom. More than 1,400 of the overseas entries clearly were U.S. diplomats or military personnel, who gave an APO address overseas. Their total contributions came to just $201,680. But others came from places as far afield as Abu Dhabi, Addis Ababa, Beijing, Fallujah, Florence, Italy, and a wide selection of towns and cities in France. Until recently, the Obama Web site allowed a contributor to select the country where he resided from the entire membership of the United Nations, including such friendly places as North Korea and the Islamic Republic of Iran. Unlike McCain's or Sen. Hillary Clinton's online donation pages, the Obama site did not ask for proof of citizenship until just recently. Clinton's presidential campaign required U.S. citizens living abroad to actually fax a copy of their passport before a donation would be accepted. With such lax vetting of foreign contributions, the Obama campaign may have indirectly contributed to questionable fundraising by foreigners. In July and August, the head of the Nigeria's stock market held a series of pro-Obama fundraisers in Lagos, Nigeria's largest city. The events attracted local Nigerian business owners. At one event, a table for eight at one fundraising dinner went for $16,800. Nigerian press reports claimed sponsors raked in an estimated $900,000. The sponsors said the fundraisers were held to help Nigerians attend the Democratic convention in Denver. But the Nigerian press expressed skepticism of that claim, and the Nigerian public anti-fraud commission is now investigating the matter. Concerns about foreign fundraising have been raised by other anecdotal accounts of illegal activities. In June, Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi gave a public speech praising Obama, claiming foreign nationals were donating to his campaign. "All the people in the Arab and Islamic world and in Africa applauded this man," the Libyan leader said. "They welcomed him and prayed for him and for his success, and they may have even been involved in legitimate contribution campaigns to enable him to win the American presidency..." Though Gadhafi asserted that fundraising from Arab and African nations were "legitimate," the fact is that U.S. federal law bans any foreigner from donating to a U.S. election campaign. The rise of the Internet and use of credit cards have made it easier for foreign nationals to donate to American campaigns, especially if they claim their donation is less than $200. Campaign spokesman LaBolt cited several measures that the campaign has adopted to "root out fraud," including a requirement that anyone attending an Obama fundraising event overseas present a valid U.S. passport, and a new requirement that overseas contributors must provide a passport number when donating online. One new measure that might not appear obvious at first could be frustrating to foreigners wanting to buy campaign paraphernalia such as T-shirts or bumper stickers through the online store. In response to an investigation conducted by blogger Pamela Geller, who runs the blog Atlas Shrugs, the Obama campaign has locked down the store. Geller picked up on the revelation, which Glenn Simpson of The Wall Street Journal reported first, that donors from the Gaza Strip had given more than $33,000 to the Obama campaign, through bulk purchases of T-shirts they had shipped to Gaza. The online campaign store allows buyers to complete their purchases by making an additional donation to the Obama campaign. A pair of Palestinian brothers named Hosam and Monir Edwan contributed more than $31,300 to the Obama campaign in October and November 2007, FEC records show. Their largesse attracted the attention of the FEC almost immediately. In an April 15, 2008, report that examined the Obama campaign's year-end figures for 2007, the FEC asked that some of these contributions be reassigned. The Obama camp complied sluggishly, prompting a more detailed admonishment form the FEC on July 30. The Edwan brothers listed their address as "GA," as in Georgia, although they entered "Gaza" or "Rafah Refugee camp" as their city of residence on most of the online contribution forms. According to the Obama campaign, they wrongly identified themselves as U.S. citizens, via a voluntary check-off box at the time the donations were made. Many of the Edwan brothers' contributions have been purged from the FEC database, but they still can be found in archived versions available for CRP and other watchdog groups. The latest Obama campaign filing shows that $891.11 still has not been refunded to the Edwan brothers, despite repeated FEC warnings and campaign claims that all the money was refunded in December. A Newsmax review of the Obama campaign finance filings found that the FEC had asked for the redesignation or refund of 53,828 donations, totaling just under $30 million. But none involves the donors who never appear in the Obama campaign reports, which the CRP estimates at nearly half the $426.8 million the Obama campaign has raised to date. Many of the small donors participated in online "matching" programs, which allows them to hook up with other Obama supporters and eventually share e-mail addresses and blogs. The Obama Web site described the matching contribution program as similar to a public radio fundraising drive. "Our goal is to bring 50,000 new donors into our movement by Friday at midnight," campaign manager David Plouffe e-mailed supporters on Sept. 15. "And if you make your first online donation today, your gift will go twice as far. A previous donor has promised to match every dollar you donate." FEC spokesman Biersack said he was unfamiliar with the matching donation drive. But he said that if donations from another donor were going to be reassigned to a new donor, as the campaign suggested, "the two people must agree" to do so. This type of matching drive probably would be legal as long as the matching donor had not exceeded the $2,300 per-election limit, he said. Obama campaign spokesman LaBolt said, "We have more than 2.5 million donors overall, hundreds of thousands of which have participated in this program." Until now, the names of those donors and where they live have remained anonymous -- and the federal watchdog agency in charge of ensuring that the presidential campaigns play by the same rules has no tools to find out. http://www.newsmax.com/timmerman/Obama_fundraising_illegal/2008/09/29/135718.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 30 Sep 08 - 09:32 AM From: Bobert Date: 16 Apr 08 - 08:35 PM .... I've carried my values with with me for a long time now and believe me, if Obama screws up I'll be on him like ugly on a gorilla... I just haven't seen the screw up yet but you can take it to the bank that if I see it I won't rationalize it and defend him... Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 16 Apr 08 - 09:24 PM I'm watching his every step, bb... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 30 Sep 08 - 10:05 AM INteresting point. SHould contributors from foreign nations -- that would have to include Israel, I suppose -- be barred from contributing to Presidential campaigns? Its an open question. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 30 Sep 08 - 10:15 AM I thought foreign entities were barred from contributing to presidential campaigns. If that wasn't the case, China could get Obama elected. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 30 Sep 08 - 10:32 AM "SHould contributors from foreign nations -- that would have to include Israel, I suppose -- be barred from contributing to Presidential campaigns?" Whether they should or not, under current law they ARE barred. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,beardedbruce Date: 30 Sep 08 - 10:35 AM "the fact is that U.S. federal law bans any foreigner from donating to a U.S. election campaign." from the post... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 30 Sep 08 - 10:35 AM Well, for example, how are they barred,exactly? Are they not allowed to buy buttons or teeshirts from political-funding websites, or just not allowed to write checks to the major parties? Anyone know, exactly, how this bar works? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Sawzaw Date: 30 Sep 08 - 10:43 AM Obama July 7 2008: "The strategic oil reserve, I think, has to be reserved for a genuine emergency. You have a situation, let's say, where there was a major oil facility in Saudi Arabia that was destroyed as a consequence of terrorist acts, and you suddenly had huge amounts of oil taken out of the world market. We wouldn't just be seeing $4-a-gallon oil (gas?). We could see a situation where entire sectors of the country had no oil to function at all. And that's what the strategic oil reserve has to be for." Obama Aug. 4 2008, "We should sell 70-million barrels of oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve for less expensive crude, which in the past has lowered gas prices within two weeks." |
